Displaying posts published in

September 2021

Will New York Come Back? Will New Yorkers? The likely next mayor says he’ll lobby all those exiles in Florida to come back, and explains how he’ll reduce crime while restoring trust in police. By Tunku Varadarajan

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-come-back-eric-adams-mayor-covid-recovery-florida-crime-charters-police-11630677464?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

Like many New Yorkers, Eric Adams plans to head for a warmer climate this winter. But for him it’s a business trip. “On Jan. 2, 2022,” he says, “I’m taking a flight to Florida, and I’m telling all those New Yorkers that live in Florida—I’m telling them, ‘Bring your butt back to New York.’ ”

Long a cold-weather bolt-hole for affluent New Yorkers, Florida became even more attractive last year as it quickly ended its pandemic restrictions. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles estimated this July that 33,500 New Yorkers—many able to work anywhere with an internet connection—had made the move in the preceding 10 months. A real-estate firm’s analysis of postal change-of-address forms counted some 26,000 moves from metro New York to the Miami area in 2020.

Mr. Adams, the Democratic nominee for New York mayor, expects to be sworn in on Jan. 1. He has good reason for wanting to win back erstwhile New Yorkers who’ve voted with their feet. Speaking by phone from the back seat of his car somewhere in his home borough of Brooklyn, he says he believes many of those who moved were “among the 65,000 New Yorkers who pay 51% of our income tax.” That is entirely plausible, given that New York City residents pay state and local income taxes at rates of up to 14.776%, while Florida has no income tax.

“I don’t blame them for leaving,” Mr. Adams says. “New York has become too violent, too bureaucratic, too expensive to do business.” He appreciates their financial contribution to the city: “We have cops on our streets, teachers in our schools and all of the other things because of those high-income-tax earners.” (He’s quick to acknowledge the contribution made, “also, by middle-income earners and even the low-income earners.”)

The election for mayor isn’t until Nov. 2, but Mr. Adams appears to be a shoo-in. Democrats outnumber Republicans 6 to 1 on the city’s voter rolls. Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg won a combined five terms as Republican nominees between 1993 and 2009, but they didn’t leave an effective party behind. Joe Lhota, a former Giuliani aide who was the GOP mayoral nominee in 2013, received less than a quarter of the vote as he lost to leftist Democrat Bill de Blasio. The current GOP nominee, radio host Curtis Sliwa, founded the Guardian Angels anticrime group in the late 1970s.

On the Democratic side, Mr. Adams prevailed as a centrist in a crowded field. He outpolled all rivals in every borough save Manhattan and did especially well in minority neighborhoods. (Mr. Adams, who is black, is serving his second term as Brooklyn borough president.) After 22 years in the New York City Police Department, rising to captain, he positioned himself as the mayoral candidate best equipped to tackle crime—a problem that seemed well under control in the Bloomberg years but has grown worse under Mr. de Blasio.

Hurricane Ida Isn’t the Whole Story on Climate The number of landfall hurricanes isn’t rising and the world is getting better at mitigating their destruction. By Bjorn Lomborg

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hurricane-ida-henri-climate-change-united-nations-un-galsgow-conference-natural-disaster-infrastructure-carbon-emissions-11630704844?mod=opinion_lead_pos8

Editor’s note: As November’s global climate conference in Glasgow draws near, important facts about climate change don’t always make it into the dominant media coverage. We’re here to help. Each week contributor Bjorn Lomborg will provide some important background so readers can have a better understanding of the true effects of climate change and the real costs of climate policy.

Hurricane season has arrived in the Atlantic Ocean. Already this summer Hurricanes Henri and Ida have caused headline-generating damage and flooding in the Gulf states, the Southeast and the Middle Atlantic states. Yet despite what you may have heard, Atlantic hurricanes are not becoming more frequent. In fact, the frequency of hurricanes making landfall in the continental U.S. has declined slightly since 1900.

Airplanes and satellites have dramatically increased the number of storms that scientists can spot at sea today, making the frequency of landfall hurricanes—which were reliably documented even in 1900—a better statistic than the total number of Atlantic hurricanes.

And there aren’t more powerful hurricanes either. The frequency Category 3 and above hurricanes making landfall since 1900 is also trending slightly down. A July Nature paper finds that the increases in strong hurricanes you’ve heard so much about are “not part of a century-scale increase, but a recovery from a deep minimum in the 1960s–1980s.”

Media Can’t Handle the Climate Truth If, after four decades, scientists see less warming and lower emissions, isn’t that good news? By Holman Jenkins Jr.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/media-climate-change-truth-degrees-warming-disaster-hurricanes-flooding-adaptation-infrastructure-united-nations-11630703058?mod=hp_opin_pos_3#cxrecs_s

If “news” is about how today differs from yesterday, the press missed a lot of news in the long-awaited new report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was issued a few weeks ago.

After 41 years of promoting a fuzzy and unsatisfying estimate of how much warming might result from a doubling of atmospheric CO2, the world’s climate science arbiter has finally offered the first real improvement in the history of modern climate science.

Through five previous U.N. assessment plus their predecessor, the 1979 Charney Report, the likely worst-case was a rise of 4.5 degrees Celsius. This came from averaging the result of inconsistent computer climate simulations about which the IPCC knew only one thing: They couldn’t all be right and perhaps none were.

Using real-world data, the new report now says the worst case is a 4-degree rise. More important, with much greater confidence than before, disastrous outcomes above 5 degrees are now found to be very unlikely.

In another departure, the U.N. panel now says the dire emissions scenario it promoted for two decades should be regarded as highly unlikely, with more plausible projections at least a third lower.

The report also notes, as the press never does, the full impact of these emissions won’t be manifested until decades, even a century, later. The ultimate likely worst-case effect of a doubling of CO2 might be 4 degrees, but the best estimate of the “transient climate response” this century is about 2.7 degrees, or 1.6 degrees on top of the warming experienced since the start of the industrial age.

Why we are reclaiming history from the distortions of Critical Race Theory By David Abulafia

https://capx.co/why-we-are-reclaiming-history-from-the-distortions-of-critical-race-theory/

Writing history is about critical assessment, not the imposition of a political agenda
Critical Race Theory is a dangerously simplistic way of explaining both the past and the present 
CRT is lightweight, imprecise and totally unconcerned with an authoritative account of the past

In 1984 George Orwell wrote, ‘Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.’  The idea of controlling the past can be traced back long before the emergence of Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. It is the backdrop to boastful inscriptions on the walls of ancient Egyptian temples at Luxor.

Today this idea has taken a new form. A way of reading the past is being imposed in universities, schools and wider society that is justified not by its historical accuracy but by its political message. The adherents of so-called Critical Race Theory (CRT) have no sense that the task of the historian is to expound the evidence, rather than to indulge in moralising jargon. They have no sense that it is important to engage in argument, rather than to impose one’s views. They have no sense that the dogma they are spreading is not taken seriously by very many historians. Or rather, it does need to be taken seriously by its opponents, for it is a dangerously simplistic way of explaining both the past and the present.

History Reclaimed is a new website that challenges the increasingly dominant dogma of the Theorists, and demands proper debate about the distorted view of history that lies at the heart of the new thinking. History Reclaimed supports the art of writing history as it has been written ever since the time of Herodotus in ancient Greece: collecting the evidence and assessing it before spinning any general theories about the nature of human development.

Interestingly, Karl Marx understood perfectly well the need to accumulate large amounts of data before moulding the arguments of Das Kapital. The days he spent in the imposing Reading Room of the British Museum were given over to serious study, as even those of us who reject his conclusions have to concede. By comparison, CRT is lightweight, imprecise in its use of terms such as ‘capitalism’, ‘imperialism’ and ‘colonialism’, and much more concerned with righting supposed wrongs in the past than in writing authoritatively about the experience of our ancestors.

At the core of the ideas that we are challenging is the notion that history has been moulded by the racism of white people towards black people. Racism is seen as an invention of white people in western Europe who sought to create worldwide empires through the brutal exploitation of the labour of black Africans. These Africans were transported in vast numbers across the Atlantic from the early sixteenth century right up to the nineteenth century, and no one can deny that their treatment was at best callous and at worst murderous. It is possible that as many as 12.5 million slaves were imported to the Americas, the largest number towards the sugar plantations of Brazil, others towards similar plantations producing sugar, cotton and tobacco in the Caribbean islands and in what became the United States.

In this interpretation, the oppression of African slaves was not merely based on pseudo-scientific ideas that different races possess different levels of intelligence. It is also argued that the Industrial Revolution that took off in 18th-century Britain was funded by the profits of the sugar industry, which depended on slave labour. The fact that there were more significant sources of capital in the agricultural transformations taking place in Britain is conveniently ignored. So too is the fact that the main source of slaves was African kingdoms that willingly sold their war captives.