Global Warming Insanity of the Day: Let's Tax Babies

Here is yet another example of how some in the environmentalist movement are going completely off the rails. An obstetric professor at the University of Western Australia thinks that families should be charged a tax of $5,000 per newborn to stop global warming. Story from the Adelaide Advertiser.

A WEST Australian medical expert wants families to pay a $5000-plus "baby levy" at birth and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 a child.

Writing in today's Medical Journal of Australia, Associate Professor Barry Walters said every couple with more than two children should be taxed to pay for enough trees to offset the carbon emissions generated over each child's lifetime.

Professor Walters, clinical associate professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia and the King Edward Memorial Hospital in Perth, called for condoms and "greenhouse-friendly" services such as sterilisation procedures to earn carbon credits.

[...]

"Every newborn baby in Australia represents a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions for an average of 80 years, not simply by breathing but by the profligate consumption of resources typical of our society," he wrote.

"Far from showering financial booty on new mothers and rewarding greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour, a 'baby levy' in the form of a carbon tax should apply, in line with the 'polluter pays' principle."

And no, this is not a joke from The Onion. When did babies become mere pollution? Walter is clearly implies that children are nothing more than agents of global warming and pollution. Last time I checked, people aren't mere objects whose only effect is to destroy.

One of my major contentions with major segments of the environmentalist movement is that their total focus is on restrictions rather than innovation or solution. This is a good example of looking at ways to restrict behavior. The idea of creating energy sources that allow economic growth while decreasing pollution seems to be something many environmentalists have no interest in. There has to be a clear understanding that steep economic decline could be just as bad as the possible effects of global warming.

Just look at how far technology has progressed in Western civilization. In the 18th century, the most common form of transportation was the horse. Today, we have space shuttles, and nuclear submarines. Need I say anymore?

(Hat tip: Hot Air)