The Al Gore lobby for venture capitalists
Since Al Gore is now a partner at venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, which in turn partners with his own investment company, Generation Investment Management, his climate change crusade can no longer be mistaken for a selfless act of political leadership.
As Generation Investment Management says: “Our preference for performance-based fees aligns our interests with that of our clients and is typically based on long-term performance.”
I’m all for private investment into alternative energy and green technology research. There’s a lot of great innovation going on there, and the field is full of promise and opportunity. In fact, private investment and free markets are how one discovers where the real cost-benefit of green technology lies. Competing marketing messages is how consumers discover new products, and get the opportunity to satisfy unmet needs or wants. If this includes the need for a cleaner environment, good on them, and good on the companies that profit from supplying that need.
Provided, of course, that governments don’t introduce market-distorting protectionist or interventionist policies.
Green activists love to paint skeptics as “oil-company funded”. As if the generalisation is true, and even when it is, as if oil companies don’t have a contribution to make to the debate, or have no right to lobby against laws and restrictions that are inimical to their interests.
Gore’s venture into capital merely underscores the point that environmentalism is a big business. Thousands of “climate scientists” depend for their income on global warming being a scary crisis that needs research funding. Thousands of green technology and alternative energy companies rely on the climate change scam for their marketing.
Every time Gore calls for a biofuel subsidy, a green tax rebate, a legal restriction, an environmental mandate, or a carbon offset, know that it is simply a marketing message for Al Gore Inc and his partners at KPCB. Know that he is simply lobbying for protectionism in favour of his own vested interests. All protectionism distorts markets, prejudices one group in favour of another, and ultimately destroys wealth. And so does every law or government policy on Al Gore’s action agenda.
Is your point that Al Gore is a ‘bad’ politician?
No, merely that he argues his own pocketbook. The conflict of interest is a delicious irony, considering the sophomoric anti-capitalism of so many of his fans, and their ritual denunciation of anyone who isn’t sufficiently green as paid apologists for big business.
Come to think of it, a full answer would depend on what you mean by “bad”. Is he capable as a politician? Sure. Will he defend the best interests of the citizenry? No, unless they happen to coincide with his own pecuniary ambitions.
What conflict of interest? If the world is screwed, environmentally, then, sure, there will be a lot of money to be made. I fail to see how this lessens his arguments. From where I’m standing, it strengthens his arguments.
“Gore’s venture into capital merely underscores the point that environmentalism is a big business.” Can you claim with a straight face that environmentalism is in the league of oil, timber,fishing companies. I mean, if it where, so what? What’s so bad about that?
Your entry boils down to an ‘ad hominem’ attack. A huge sweeping one that includes his “loony” supporters. I know you like that phrase so I’ve pre-emptively deployed it.
Look, I find it admirable (to some small degree) that you’re out there waving your flag in the face of near-consensus in the scientific community. I just don’t find you even slightly convincing.
My entry was intended to show the hypocrisy of the usual retort to global warming skeptics, that they’re funded by, or shills for, Big Oil or some other corporate interest. Yes, I do think that environmentalism is in the league of oil, timber, fishing companies. In fact, it’s probably a lot bigger in terms of research funding on climate change.
But I’d object (in fact, I do object) just as strongly to a politician that argues for protectionist measures or subsidies for the oil industry.
As I pointed out, I admire entrepreneurs who see opportunities in clean energy. Tesla Motors is an excellent example. I love that company. It’s a great idea, and good luck to Elon Musk for selling it. But I’d have a major problem with Elon Musk turning this into a political platform that demands laws and regulations beneficial to his commercial interests.
This, essentially, is what Al Gore is doing. Yes, it’s entirely independent of the substance of his arguments, which are also significantly problematic, but it’s not irrelevant. Nor is it ad hominem.