You need a sense of scale George

Mr. Monbiot tells us that James Inhofe is entirely bought by oil and gas contributions to his re-election camaigns.

Which he might be, for sure. But George sends us to the actual numbers.

Koch Industries contibuted $44k out of $6 million total. Oil and gas was $500 k out of that $6 million. Yes, significant sums but then:

For people like the Kochs, Murray Energy and Harold Clark Simmons, the money they give to politicians is small change. For environmental campaigns, contributions of this size would break the bank. The money available to big business means that there will always be a massive asymmetry of this kind in the potential for political funding. As a result, a political system which imposes no effective cap on campaign finance leads inexorably to plutocracy: governance on behalf of the richest people and corporations.

That, I\’m afraid, is entirely bollocks. What\’s the annual budget of the WWF? Sierra Club? Greenpeace? (that last is $500 million a year alone isn\’t it?).

Note that the eeeevil fossil fuels lobby has spent $500k over 7 years on Inhofe. At those sort of rates the environmental organisations can buy the entire Senate and still have cash left over for tea and buns.

I\’m sorry, but this talk of the massive amount of money being distributed by the oil and gas industry is simply nonsense. Because it\’s not looking at the much larger sums available to the other side of the same argument.

26 thoughts on “You need a sense of scale George”

  1. In a week when our Olympic athletes have to put up with death threats from internet trolls, George Monbiot falls into the lazy Left wing habit of calling commenters under his articles who debate with facts and argument as “trolls”.

    Response to NeverMindTheBollocks, 2 August 2012 3:54PM
    Do you have a job aside from trolling every article I write? Nothing better to do? No family? No hobbies? Or is this the job?

  2. This is, of course, a classic case of Left-wing projection, as is the psycho-babble campaign being fitfully run on the wackier Green blogs accusing sceptics of being more likely to be conspiracy theorists.

  3. I’m sorry, but this talk of the massive amount of money being distributed by the oil and gas industry is simply nonsense.

    Indeed. Having attended quite a few oil and gas seminars, the talk is all about the challenges global warming presents and the role of oil and gas companies will have in meeting those challenges, whilst still providing energy. The oil companies simply don’t see their existence threatened by global warming and the world’s reaction to it.

    If you want to know where oil and gas companies do pay their monies in lobbying, you only need listen to their talking about their greatest challenges: maintaining production and accessing reserves. Simply put, western politicians aren’t worth spending big bucks on.

  4. Part of Monbiot’s worldview is that he is a put-upon victim though, regardless of his upper crust upbringing and genealogy. He needs the “Woe is me these nasty kkkorporats have more money for climate denialism” canard to maintain that facade.

  5. The fossil fuel industry knows that the reality is that world demand for energy continues to rise inexorably and the only practical way of supplying it is fossil fuels. Renewables are not going to take more than a flea bite out of the pie. Why waste millions on trying to counter the AGW crowd, when cold hard reality means you will continue to rake in the cash from oil, gas and coal sales whatever they say or do?

    Modern life is totally predicated on fossil fuel energy. Take that away for even a few weeks and we would be in anarchy, Mad Max territory. The fossil fuel companies know this, and know their profits will continue to roll in as long as they can pump and dig the stuff out of the ground.

  6. The Left cling to the belief that they are David and not Goliath, but in the world of environmental politics they are Goliath reported on by Goliath’s mum.

  7. Do you have something a little more substantial to offer, Unity, or is a crank someone with whom you disagree? Or perhaps you just wanted to link to your own site.

  8. Pure protectionism, the left and environmentalists are so in to buying politicians and policies that they believe that the “other side” must be doing the same. Like the Heartland debacle showed, the actual amounts supplied by the traditional foes to the fashionable left wing causes is derisory.

    Politics is so corrupt, but the money is almost entirely on the left, which would be surprising if you couldn’t see through the rhetoric and look at the reality.

  9. Do you have something a little more substantial to offer

    Pages and pages, usually.

    Well researched and informative but pages thereof.

    He’s right though – Inhofe is a little bit strange, even for USian politics.

  10. Whether he is a crank or not is irrelevant to the discussion. He may well be but the point is the green left is rolling in taxpayers money when compared to the opposition, crank or not.

    You would have thought someone interested in science would have noticed that.

    And of course so should the Moonbat.

  11. “Response to NeverMindTheBollocks, 2 August 2012 3:54PM
    Do you have a job aside from trolling every article I write? Nothing better to do? No family? No hobbies? Or is this the job?”

    That last part is particularly telling. Sometimes Monbiot gives the impression that he genuinely believes that everyone who disagrees with him or even dislikes him has been paid to do so.

  12. Someone writes something that he knows won’t get 100% support from the public. And then thinks those who disagree have been paid to do that.
    Perhaps he thinks the economic crisis is solveable that way? Pay people to post stuff? Hey, works for him – does he not get paid to write stuff that gets posted online?

  13. So, Surreptitious Evil, do you have something more substantial to offer to support your assertion of Inhovian strangevity?

  14. DocBud,

    I take it you are a banjo Republican? Well, then, as Google is obviously a little too hard for you to use, let’s see.

    Inhofe confuses being gay with being political
    Inhofe thinks Guantanomo isn’t a stinking sore on the reputation of the USA as a moral and law-abiding nation
    Latvia, apparently, is on a supply route between the USA and Afghanistan
    He’s a Young Earth Creationist

    And, btw, “strangevity” isn’t a word. Not even in American.

  15. I don’t think Guantanamo is a stinking sore or otherwise…..anyway after causing the oceans to recede isn’t Obama going to ………oh sorry.

  16. Surreptitious Evil,

    I don’t know what a banjo Republican is and can’t be arsed to google it. I really think that if someone wishes to impugn someone’s character they ought to substantiate their claims rather than make a simplistic assertion and expect others to do their own research to verify it.

    Strangevity not a word, oh I feel such a goose.

  17. The more I read about this guy the more I like him.
    He supports gitmo. Yay.
    He supports Israel. Yay.
    He hates warmists. Yay, yay.

    Where can I donate?

  18. Thanks, Unity, I’ll certainly take on board the views of a politically opinionated Norwegian who links to Deltoid and Wikipedia to push his cause.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *