4 ms·
The war is perfectly winnable, but not within the context of a democracy. Here you would need the equivalent of a state of emergency, lasting for perhaps a cent
by atlantic 8y ago
The war is perfectly winnable, but not within the context of a democracy. Here you would need the equivalent of a state of emergency, lasting for perhaps a century, to force the necessary changes upon an unwilling public, who are quite happy to sort trash into three piles, stop using straws, or engage in other such cargo-cult behaviours, but not to give up their iPhones, 2nd cars or annual vacations.
Ironically, a country such as China is much better equipped than the US or Europe to handle this kind of emergency. Once the leading figures become convinced of what needs to be done, they can implement the necessary measures in full and overnight, and ensure the necessary public support via the state-controlled educational system and media.
In the West, we are reduced to endless haggling, as lobbies strive to convert the emergency into additional demand for new "green" product lines or for bogus geoengineering solutions, and political representatives end up implementing toothless half-measures that achieve nothing.
- TheCoelacanth 8y agoA large majority of Americans support adding a revenue-neutral carbon tax, which demonstrates a willingness to reduce consumption as long as it is part of a concerted action and not just an insignificant choice by a single person that will make no noticeable difference to climate change. We need "leaders" to catch up with the general public's views on this matter, not the other way around.
- leereeves 8y agoOr a large number of Americans think they personally could afford to pay a carbon tax and are happy to place the burden on poor people who cannot.
- TheCoelacanth 8y agoThe money has to come from somewhere. If I have to pay a tax on carbon, I have to spend less money on something else. Regardless of whether or not I can afford a carbon tax, it still has to result in lower consumption.
- leereeves 8y agoThat's only true if you live hand-to-mouth and spend every penny on consumption. The poor would be forced to reduce consumption; the wealthy already have more money than they can spend.
- RestlessMind 8y ago> A large majority of Americans support adding a revenue-neutral carbon tax Citation please? And how much of that is "stated preference" vs "revealed preference"? I might say a lot of idealistic things if those are never going to pan out. Luckily, USA allows this type of experimentation by allowing carbon tax to be introduced at state-level. So if a state (eg. New York or California) can demonstrate that revenue neutral carbon tax is palatable to the populace while reducing carbon emissions, that would be a realistic political path to introduce it to wider population.
- Tade0 8y agoI can't agree and I think the problems you're describing concern mostly the US. European emmisions are not only lower than the ones generated in the US despite the larger population of the former but also until last year have been consistently falling since at least 1990 contrary to what was happening in the latter. My take is that there has to be less involvement of private entities in shaping regulations in the US. Once that's out it will be possible to e.g. make people drive smaller, more fuel efficient cars by raising taxes on fuel. Currently driving a Ford F150 is as cheap in the US as driving a compact hybrid in most European countries- this is ridiculous and needs to stop.