Economy
The White Pill: Big Government Can Be Defeated (Just Ask the Soviet Union)
From StosselTV
People have been “black pilled” to think the world is doomed. Michael Malice says there’s hope.
In his book, “The White Pill,” he argues that tyrannical regimes, like the Soviet Union, can be toppled.
Today, media and universities distort history, and push socialism. It used to be worse. The New York Times once covered up Stalin’s famine, even as millions starved. Why? Malice says it’s because NYT star reporter Walter Duranty liked communism’s utopian promises, and status he got from his exclusive Stalin interviews.
Malice says the fall of the Soviet Union should give us hope that America can resist the universities and media’s brainwashing – or any tyranny that someone is “black pilled” about.
Our video explains Malice’s “white pill” and why you might want to take it.
After 40+ years of reporting, I now understand the importance of limited government and personal freedom.
——————————————
Libertarian journalist John Stossel created Stossel TV to explain liberty and free markets to young people.
Prior to Stossel TV he hosted a show on Fox Business and co-anchored ABC’s primetime newsmagazine show, 20/20.
Stossel’s economic programs have been adapted into teaching kits by a non-profit organization, “Stossel in the Classroom.” High school teachers in American public schools now use the videos to help educate their students on economics and economic freedom. They are seen by more than 12 million students every year.
Stossel has received 19 Emmy Awards and has been honored five times for excellence in consumer reporting by the National Press Club. Other honors include the George Polk Award for Outstanding Local Reporting and the George Foster Peabody Award.
Links
————
To get our new weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscribe
————
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Has the time come for America to seriously reassess its participation in and support for the United Nations (U.N.)?
It’s a question that some prominent people are asking this week after the increasingly woke and essentially useless globalist body attempted to sneak a global carbon tax in through the back door while no one was looking.
Except someone was looking, as it turns out. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who chairs the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and is part of the majority on both the Senate Judiciary and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, said in an X post Thursday evening that this latest bit of anti-American action “warrants our withdrawal from the UN.”
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in his own X post on the matter on Wednesday that the Trump administration “will not allow the UN to tax American citizens and companies. Under the leadership of POTUS (President Donald Trump), the U.S. will be a hard NO. We call on other nations to stand alongside the United States in defense of our citizens and sovereignty.”
On Friday afternoon, Mr. Rubio took to X again to announce the news that efforts by himself and others in the Trump administration succeeded in killing an effort to move the tax forward during a meeting in London. However, the proposal is not fully dead – a final vote on it was simply delayed for a year.
The issue at hand stems from an attempt by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) – an agency of the U.N. – to impose net-zero rules on fuels used for seaborne shipping operations. The Trump administration estimates the imposition of the new requirements will increase the cost of shipping goods by about 10%, thus creating yet another round of inflation hitting the poorest citizens the hardest thanks to the globalist obsession with the amount of plant food – carbon dioxide – in the atmosphere.
Known as the IMO Net-Zero Framework, the proposal claims it would effectively “zero out” emissions from the shipping industry by 2050.
The potential implications if the U.N. ultimately succeeds in implementing its own global carbon tax are obvious. If this unelected, unaccountable globalist body can levy a carbon tax on Americans, a concept that America’s own elected officials have steadfastly rejected across the terms of the last five U.S. presidents, what would then prevent it from imposing other kinds of taxes on the world to support its ideological goals?
President Trump’s opposition to exactly this kind of international intrusion into America’s domestic policy choices is the reason why he has twice won the presidency, each time de-committing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords.
It has become increasingly obvious in recent years that the central goal of the global climate alarm movement is to dramatically raise the cost of all kinds of energy in order to force the masses to live smaller, more restricted lives and make their behavior easier for authoritarian governments to control. This camel’s nose under the tent move by the U.N. to sneak a global carbon tax into reality is just the latest in a long parade of examples that serve as proof points for that thesis.
At some point, U.S. officials must seriously reassess the value proposition in continuing to spend billions of dollars each year supporting and hosting a globalist organization whose every action seems designed to inflict damage on our country and its people. Now would be a good time to do that, in fact.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
A United Nations (UN) proposal for a global carbon tax, which threatened to raise consumer costs, was tabled on Friday following pressure from the Trump administration.
Members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UN body based in London, met this week to vote on a “Net-Zero Framework,” which would have imposed steep penalties on ship emissions. A majority of countries at the agency voted on Friday to postpone the decision for a year after the Trump administration pushed back and threatened retaliation against states supporting the measure.
“Common sense prevailed. The Trump Administration will not stand for the UN or any organization forcing American taxpayers to foot the bill for their environmental pet projects,” a senior State Department official told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
The proposed IMO Net-Zero Framework, aimed at achieving global shipping emissions neutrality by 2050, would have imposed taxes of $100 to $380 per ton of CO2 on ships that failed to meet targets. If the global fleet fell even 10% short of the targets, costs could soar to $20 to $30 billion by 2030 and exceed $300 billion by 2035, by some estimates.
The Trump administration has warned the plan could raise global shipping costs by as much as 10%, forcing higher prices for American consumers.
“The collapse of the UN-backed shipping emissions deal is not the disaster portrayed by climate activists — it’s a victory for sovereignty over what amounted to taxation without representation,” Anthony Watts, Senior Fellow at The Heartland Institute, told the DCNF. “Shipping may account for 3% of global emissions, but it moves 90% of global trade; taxing it in the name of ‘net zero’ would have punished consumers and developing nations alike while enriching bureaucrats and consultants in Geneva and New York.”
President Donald Trump personally weighed in against the measure.
“The United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping, and will not adhere to it in any way, shape, or form. We will not tolerate increased prices on American Consumers OR, the creation of a Green New Scam Bureaucracy to spend YOUR money on their Green dreams,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform Thursday. “Stand with the United States, and vote NO in London tomorrow!”
The Trump administration had threatened that member states backing the measures could face a range of repercussions, including probes into anti-competitive practices, visa restrictions on maritime crews, commercial and financial penalties, increased port fees, and sanctions targeting officials promoting climate policies.
“Better than merely not signing a UN climate treaty is promising to punish countries that do sign. The result is no treaty. Thank you, President Trump,” Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team advisor, told the DCNF.
Frank Lasee, president of Truth in Energy and Climate, said the president’s stance helped protect consumers from “neocolonial mandates that enrich China at our expense.”
“This global carbon tax isn’t climate action; it’s economic sabotage,” Lasee told the DCNF. “Trump’s masterstroke preserves innovation, low taxes, and freedom from globalist overreach — ensuring our future remains bright without new well-funded UN mischief.”
The City of Red Deer’s Financial Troubles: Here Are The Candidates I Am Voting For And Why.
UN, Gates Foundation push for digital ID across 50 nations by 2028
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
The Trials of Liberty: What the Truckers Taught Canada About Power and Protest
-
Alberta1 day ago
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
-
National1 day agoDemocracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case
-
Business1 day agoOver two thirds of Canadians say Ottawa should reduce size of federal bureaucracy
-
Business2 days ago
Trump Admin Blows Up UN ‘Global Green New Scam’ Tax Push, Forcing Pullback
-
Business2 days ago
Trump Blocks UN’s Back Door Carbon Tax
-
Media1 day agoCanada’s top Parliamentary reporters easily manipulated by the PMO’s “anonymous sources”
-
Red Deer2 days agoYour last minute election prep: Common Sense Red Deer talks to the candidates
-
Agriculture1 day agoIs the CFIA a Rogue Agency or Just Taking Orders from a Rogue Federal Government?