3 ms·

It gets plenty of attention from the top, the problem is that most measures to curtail emissions have negative economic impacts. You don't want to be the Senato

It gets plenty of attention from the top, the problem is that most measures to curtail emissions have negative economic impacts. You don't want to be the Senator/Congressman that made foreclosures rise because factories went belly up. Also, at least in the West, the general consensus is that even if the US were to cut emissions drastically it would hardly make a dent due to China and India. So you'd cripple the US economy, but China and India would continue at pace and become even more cost competitive. The only real solution is a global binding resolution with audits, similar to nuclear treaties...not a Paris Accord which was not binding and largely just fodder. It's not an easy problem, it's certainly not as easy as the younger generation seems to think when it comes to fixing. Not only is the environment at stake, but so are people's paychecks and livelihoods. The Green New Deal did the movement no favors by being completely outlandish and unrealistic in a global economy.

imafish 7y ago
In my opinion, this is the same as saying that we should keep using slaves for manual labor, because it would hurt the economy if we set them free. It should not be allowed to ruin the world for other people as a living. If China and India keep doing that, we stop buying their stuff. However, if we keep ruining the world for a living ourselves, it is very hard to point fingers at others. Also, there are still lots of money to be made in renewable energy and emissionless energy consumption. Tax what you want less of, give financial support to what you want more of.
- partiallypro 7y ago
  You lost me at comparing an externality to literal slavery. I'm sure if you lost your job and were without a job for a year or 3, you'd not sing the same tune. "If China and India keep doing that, we stop buying their stuff." This would cripple the global economy and throw millions into poverty.

imafish 7y ago

In my opinion, this is the same as saying that we should keep using slaves for manual labor, because it would hurt the economy if we set them free. It should not be allowed to ruin the world for other people as a living. If China and India keep doing that, we stop buying their stuff. However, if we keep ruining the world for a living ourselves, it is very hard to point fingers at others. Also, there are still lots of money to be made in renewable energy and emissionless energy consumption. Tax what you want less of, give financial support to what you want more of.

partiallypro 7y ago
You lost me at comparing an externality to literal slavery. I'm sure if you lost your job and were without a job for a year or 3, you'd not sing the same tune. "If China and India keep doing that, we stop buying their stuff." This would cripple the global economy and throw millions into poverty.