Except if we act now we will be one of the LAST to act, not the first, and the positive potential for the economy is huge. The USA is already trailing most other countries in this directional shift, so the basis for your “calculations” might need to be re-examined.
Except this isn’t just an economic issue. If we don’t find a solution we are all f*cked big time. Really we need a solution at any cost, because the alternative is unthinkable. The cost of not finding a solution far outweighs the cost of any of the proposed solutions to date.
First of all, every problem based on a logical construct with the assumption of intelligent actors is an economic problem at the end of the day.
Second, the benefits of acting only automatically outweigh the costs as you are suggesting if success is taken as a given result of said actions. My entire argument is that success is far from a given. Neither you nor anyone else has provided any evicence to the contrary here because unfortunately as far as I am aware no compelling evidence exists that action on the part of the US or any other country acting unilaterally has more than a remote potential to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change. The answer at the end of the day here is likely that we are fucked. That is hard to digest in our culture but the acceptance of reality has never been a prerequisite for its existence.
And of course the bit that the deniers are circulating is Nye holding up a picture of the Arctic while saying “Antarctic” to prove that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
They don’t have teeth in large part because the US (and a couple others) have refused to let them have any teeth. It is a circular argument.
We can’t do anything unless everyone has to do it, and we refuse to let anyone have the authority to make everyone do it, so we can’t do anything. So fuck it, let’s get a beer and wring our hands while we burn the world. Lazy thinking, rooted in a shockingly myopic worldview.
Personaly I am not worried all that much. China will get involved in a catastrophic war with the US with the next 20-30 years so they could both elliminate eachother climate change contribution. Huzza!
I find that to be a very shortsighted form of reductionism. There may be an economic component, or economic consequences, but that is a far cry from reducing it to a strictly economic problem. This problem is much bigger then that, the economic component is only one aspect.
The main economic aspect unfortunately is the political lobbies with economic influences are the main reason why the US isn’t making any traction in addressing the issue in an intelligent manner, because while addressing the issues would have a positive net economic benefit for the country, it would negativity effect their bottom lines. They are more concerned with their profit then the very future of humanity or the economic welfare of the country as a whole.
[quote=“drman321, post:63, topic:22996”]
My entire argument is that success is far from a given. Neither you nor anyone else has provided any evicence to the contrary here because unfortunately as far as I am aware no compelling evidence exists that action on the part of the US or any other country acting unilaterally has more than a remote potential to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change.[/quote]
That isn’t true. In fact every study shows that is the only possibility of avoiding the catastrophic effects, likely it will take additional measures as well such as carbon sequestering and such, but without doing that the chances are nil. So the bet is no chance versus our only chance, seems like we should all be voting for our only chance if we had any concern for humanity.
That is a possibility, but really anyone with any sense whatsoever should realize that we really should try to do every possible thing in our power to prevent this nihilistic outcome whatever the cost.
because obviously siiting and waiting for deus ex machina to solve our (climate change) problems is better strategy that actually stepping up and do something.
dumb bitch and her ilk, hmmm perhaps we should start accusing and hopefully eventually charging them with genocide. Ultimately that is what it is, wilful destruction, knowingly implicit.
You’re all discussing the facts and that’s very cute. But those don’t really matter. The republican party is involved in this ideological trench war where they can’t admit they’re wrong on any of their key talking point. It doesn’t matter that you can prove climate change is caused by humans, that trickle down doesn’t work, that Obamacare is essentially Romneycare, that not raising the dept sealing would destroy the economy. I think many republicans don’t even believe what they’re preaching. But as long as using semantic tricks to stop the last few remaining old white people voting for the other guys still works; Foxnewspeak it will be.
Exactly. Most of the polls I have seen show climate change at the bottom of voters’ priorities.
“I’d like to increase your energy bill right now in order to prevent something that might be pretty bad in seventy years” has so far failed to catch on as a campaign slogan.
US leadership isn’t going to take real action without pressure from the handful of voters in their particular district that haven’t already made up their minds, especially from their base in primaries. ftfy
To be fair your definition of “economic” is an example of shortsighted reductionism. The study of economics can be applied to virtually any question where there are incentives. You are viewing the term only in terms of “money”. My example of the prisoners dilemma is an example of economic thinking being used to weigh incentives to determine a likely outcome. No discussion of money in that thought experiment.
Yeah, and as long as there are politicians in the pockets of the energy industry, they will continue to downplay the impact of climate change. And if the voters don’t hear about what an important topic it is, they will continue to rate it low in importance.
Just look at how important lowering taxes as become, and high taxes isn’t even a real issue!
