The UN has proposed a global insurance plan to cover poor people against damages due to global heating effects.

A system like this could reduce the harm done by global heating effects for some period of time — perhaps ten years. But if we fail to curb the emissions, this will be like compensating people on the sinking Titanic for their inconvenience during the sinking process.

Of course, the wealthy countries ought to pay for this. They ought to pay the costs of ending fossil fuel use, too.

The Sackler chain of businesses can do all the stages of making money from a painkiller — from designing it, to getting approval of it, to marketing it, to organizing "the public" to campaign for access to it.

Now Sackler is turning the same methods to promotion of charter schools which he can own.

Nebraska approved the Keystone XL pipeline. Earth defenders will still try to stop it with lawsuits and protests.

A senator proposes to ban smoking in new French films.

Forget about the response that attacks a straw man (to ban showing old films where characters smoke, which nobody proposes); I ask, why do films show smoking? Is this because French directors just love to show smoking? Or is this paid "product placement"?

If it is the latter, that suggests prohibiting paid product placement, direct or indirect, and not censoring the films themselves.

Russian "Troll Army" Tweets Cited More Than 80 Times in UK Media.