January 31, 2024

Further Notes On Mann v. Steyn: The Plaintiff Rests

January 31, 2024/ Francis Menton

The Mann v. Steyn trial in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is now in the middle of its third week. For more background on the case, see my post from a few days ago here.
I have been watching some substantial chunks of the trial on the court’s livestream, although unfortunately several other matters have prevented me from watching the entirety. Today at the lunch break, the plaintiff Michael Mann concluded the presentation of his case. The technical term is that the plaintiff “rested.” So I thought a short update would be timely.
Because I haven’t seen the whole thing, I’ll just cover some aspects that I find interesting.

January 27, 2024

Some Notes On The Trial Of Mann v. Steyn

January 27, 2024/ Francis Menton

Way back in October 2012, climate alarmist and activist Michael Mann brought a libel suit against Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg for allegedly defamatory blog posts that the two had written a few months previously.
The case has gone through an incredible history of procedural twists and turns since then, a few of which I have covered in prior blog posts, for example here on March 20, 2014, and here on March 26, 2021. The trial finally started on January 16.
Probably most readers here are familiar with the case to at least some degree, and many may even be following the trial. (The court has a live feed available to the public. Follow this link at WattsUpWithThat if you want to tune in during the coming week.). I have watched some substantial chunks of the trial during its first two weeks.
So what have they been talking about all that time without ever getting to the Hockey Stick?

January 23, 2024

January 23, 2024/ Francis Menton

Read any few articles of your choosing on the status of New York’s residential housing market, and you will quickly learn that it is in “crisis.” The vacancy rate is minuscule, the prices are astronomical, many apartments are small and/or in poor condition, and everyone with any kind of normal job is completely priced out.
The funny thing is that the “crisis” has existed ever since the onset of the post-World War II economic boom in the late 1940s, or in other words for some 75+ years. While other states and cities have let the markets sort out matters of housing supply and demand, our politicians have promised to use the magic of government edicts to deliver better solutions.
The “solutions” they have implemented are all one form or another of government central planning — price controls, subsidies, and mandates. A slight and gradual loosening of these restriction occurred during the several decades from the 80s to the 00s; but the last few years have seen a newly emboldened progressive-controlled state legislature re-imposing and tightening every restriction they can think of.

January 20, 2024

January 20, 2024/ Francis Menton

What will the death of the green energy illusion look like?
From time to time (see, for example, here and here) I have described a vision where some state or country runs headlong into a “green energy wall” — an impassable barricade of physical impossibility, characterized by scarcity and blackouts, into which the country crashes suddenly. Among the net zero zealot countries I have identified as the leading candidates for imminently hitting such a wall are Germany and the UK.
But perhaps, instead of a sudden crash, the demise of the green energy illusion will look more like a slow but steady decline, a gradual withering of economic activity and prosperity.
In this scenario, high energy prices brought about by energy restrictions drive important industries out of business and, as good jobs disappear and energy prices increase, the people gradually and inexorably get poorer.
Recent events in the UK and Germany seem to point in the direction of this type of scenario.

January 18, 2024

January 18, 2024/ Francis Menton

In a world of now close to 200 countries, every day provides an updated report card as to what works and what doesn’t in economic policy. As reported by the IMF, World Bank, and UN, some countries have per capita GDP as much as 300 times more than the per capita GDP of other countries. What are the poor ones doing wrong?
Most countries largely stick with the same collection of economic policies for long periods of time, with only small changes. Unsurprisingly, the rich get richer, because what they are doing is working. The poor may or may not get poorer, but at best they stagnate, unless they are ready to try the things that have made the rich rich.
But every once in a while you get a country that makes a relatively significant change. Two that are doing that now are China and Argentina.
Which one is more likely to be successful going forward?

January 15, 2024

January 15, 2024/ Francis Menton

At any given moment in the course of human events, not everyone can be the leader. And thus can the world only have a small number of “climate leaders” to light us the way to the Great Green Energy Nirvana of the future.
Among that select group of “climate leaders,” New York is definitely one. We know that because New York enacted its Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act in 2018, announcing its “climate leadership” to the world for all to envy.
But there are a handful of jurisdictions out there that are not to be outdone in the competition for the title of “climate leader.” One of those is the UK. Ten years before New York even entered the competition, the UK had enacted its Climate Change Act of 2008, setting an initial round of legally-binding emissions reduction targets (80% below 1990 levels by 2050). Then, in 2019 the UK upped the ante, committing by statute to “net zero” greenhouse gas emissions for its entire economy by 2050.
We know from my last post how things are going with this “climate leadership” thing in New York: five years into the competition, New York’s greenhouse gas emissions have actually increased substantially, as two large new natural gas power plants have replaced electricity generation from two prematurely-closed emissions-free nuclear facilities, while generation of electricity from wind and solar has barely budged.
Has the UK been any more successful?