A Rigged Market?

Sure! If you’re talking about Europe’s approach to the Kyoto accord.

The first swindle involves Europe using a 1990 baseline. The closure of socialist industry in eastern Europe, a massive Scandinavian economic crisis, and mad cow disease's effect on livestock production crashed emissions by 1995. Result?

The result was a kind of “heads I win, tails you lose” set-up. It was a position that activist distracts real people who actually DO clean the environment, and actually DO produce things from improving the fate of man, especially it’s weakest and poorest.

Further to the “positive results”, a shallow gin-up:

"In 1997 in Kyoto, the EU27 signed on to an aggregate cap on their GHGs that was 14% ABOVE the member states' aggregate 1995 actual emissions. [From 1997 to 2008]... Spain, +32.8%; Latvia, +27.4%; Cyprus, +23.1%; Estonia, +21.0%; Greenland (a Danish colony), +16.6%; Luxembourg, +16.2%; Lithuania, +13.6%; Ireland, +13.0%; Ukraine, +11.5%; Malta, +9.0%; Austria, + 7.5%; Bulgaria, +8.4%; Italy, +5.9%; Belgium, +4.0%; Netherlands, +3.2%; Portugal, +4.2%; France, +1.5%; Finland, -1.6%, United Kingdom, -2.9%.

It should be noted, further, that 100% of the emission "reductions" claimed by EU member states to date derive from offshoring manufacturing of goods and services EU demand, which has actually increased."

In a world of paper shufflers and paper tigers, that is considered “real”, “honest”, and a “brave facing of the issues”. Go figure.

Not letting a crisis go to waste, the recession will (no doubt) be reframed in emissions-terms with the “great leap forward” treatment, as presented in venal international fora. That’s the political dynamic of the new age of man that they are “inspiring us,“ and leading us in to.