6 ms·

Whenever I talk to (privileged) people here in the US about this, I try to bring one point across. As a whole, people are in too much pain and stress to have an

by eiji 7y ago

Whenever I talk to (privileged) people here in the US about this, I try to bring one point across. As a whole, people are in too much pain and stress to have any appreciation for a climate crisis. Whatever you may think, as a whole, people have to deal (personally and emotionally) with (sometimes perceived) much bigger crisis than that of the climate. As long as people live pay-check to pay-check on the brink of no health-insurance, the brink of missing mortgage- or rent-payments and ending on the streets, the brink of high medical bills, the brink of 15k a year preschool expenses, the brink of retirement ... There is always a crisis stressing people out because there is nothing but yourself to fall back on in the event of a disaster. And since nobody is politically (dare I say globally) willing to provide relief for such kind of warranted fears and concerns for ones individual future, people have to room to spend more on the perma frost, Florida homes or an underwater New York.

hannob 7y ago
> Whatever you may think, as a whole, people have to deal (personally and emotionally) with (sometimes perceived) much bigger crisis than that of the climate. That is... until they have to evacuate their home, because there's a wildfire or hurricane nearby or the rising sealevel makes it unsafe.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  It’s hard to link natural disasters to climate change definitely on an individual basis, unfortunately.
  - pier25 7y ago
    Individual disasters yes, but not trends. We are seeing once-a-decade or once-every-few-decades events much more frequently now.
nicoburns 7y ago
A lot of the climate change movements have very progressive politics that addresses some of these issues too. Of course this often isn't palatable to (economically) privileged people, as it means them giving up some of that economic power. But ultimately, I can't see how the climate issues will be solved any other way.
Brakenshire 7y ago
The thing is, a lot of the necessary changes will have no impact on ordinary people’s lives. The UK is now up to more than 50% clean electricity for instance, and most people are not aware it has happened. And the UK is not even using the cheapest forms of electricity production much (hydro because it doesn’t have the right topology, solar because of the high latitude, onshore wind because of population density and political decisions). Those renewable sources of electricity - solar, onshore wind and hydro - are now the cheapest way to produce electricity full stop, even ignoring the pollution externalities of the alternatives, and countries that have access to those resources do not need to sacrifice anything except a bit of technocratic hassle to get to a high level of renewable electricity. Getting to net zero carbon in total (including heating and transportation) would be expensive with current technology, but probably won’t be very expensive given the technological progress which can happen over the next 30 years, if we do the basic things right, follow a reasonable pathway, and give companies plenty of time to make investments and incremental progress. It’s highly likely electric vehicles will be cheaper over that timeframe, for instance. Your point is true, and it excuses a lack of pressure from the public, but it doesn’t excuse the media lying to their audience to gratify them. Nor representative politicians who are meant to use their own judgement remaining ignorant, and avoiding the boring technocratic steps necessary to help, or even just allow, the transition to take place.
- makomk 7y ago
  That depends exactly what we mean by "coal power subsidies". For example, the UK came under a lot of criticism recently for the scale of its subsidies for fossil fuel power, but if you look at the fine print the vast majority of those subsidies were the result of us having a lower rate of VAT on all domestic electricity and heating regardless of its source. Getting rid of that lower rate would put up the price of electricity for ordinary people across the board, no matter whether it was generated by clean or fossil sources.
  - Robotbeat 7y ago
    That's a good point. And that could easily lead to a worse result. For instance, the cost of diesel in Germany is lower than in the UK but the price of electricity is significantly lower in the UK than in Germany, which basically punishes electric cars (which have significantly lower lifetime emissions per km than comparable diesel vehicles) in Germany while encouraging them in the UK. This is one thing we need to pay attention to as more and more of global emissions are transportation related instead of electricity related: punishing electricity production without also properly tariffing liquid fuels could backfire by discouraging electrification of transport.
teekert 7y ago
In "socialist" Netherlands where getting Cancer won't cost you a cent and we basically have Universal income (in the form of bijstand and various subsidies) most people still don't care (edit:) enough to do something with their own money.
- davedx 7y ago
  Then why are GroenLinks winning more seats with each election? I agree our government could and should have done more, starting quite a few years ago. We are behind on our commitments. But I don't think it's fair to say "most people still don't care". Many Dutchies I know do care. Some just don't know what they can really do to help, or can't afford to do the things that would help. Even putting solar panels on your roof (an effective and economical thing to do) is beyond the financial / living situation of most people. If we can just stop FvD's insane climate change denial that would probably help too...
natch 7y ago
Your post is spot on but (pardon my off topic comment) anyone who thinks they need 15k for preschool has not discovered parent coop nursery schools which are an order of magnitude cheaper, and awesome if not way more awesome due to parental involvement. >people have to room to spend more on Didn’t quite understand that part. More on topic, personally I’ve taken on some financial costs and gotten some hedonistic rewards by buying a Tesla. Maybe if people are rewarded for making moves in the right direction, that will help.
nerdponx 7y ago
I'm not going to go so far as to say this is by design, but it's certainly a convenient state of affairs for certain actors. For instance, it's long been known that fomenting racism is a great way to keep people busy/distracted while you implement whatever policy you want, or use said racism as a basis to justify that policy. Keeping people in a state of distracted stupidity is often good business.

by eiji 7y ago

hannob 7y ago

> Whatever you may think, as a whole, people have to deal (personally and emotionally) with (sometimes perceived) much bigger crisis than that of the climate. That is... until they have to evacuate their home, because there's a wildfire or hurricane nearby or the rising sealevel makes it unsafe.

saagarjha 7y ago
It’s hard to link natural disasters to climate change definitely on an individual basis, unfortunately.
- pier25 7y ago
  Individual disasters yes, but not trends. We are seeing once-a-decade or once-every-few-decades events much more frequently now.

nicoburns 7y ago

A lot of the climate change movements have very progressive politics that addresses some of these issues too. Of course this often isn't palatable to (economically) privileged people, as it means them giving up some of that economic power. But ultimately, I can't see how the climate issues will be solved any other way.

Brakenshire 7y ago

The thing is, a lot of the necessary changes will have no impact on ordinary people’s lives. The UK is now up to more than 50% clean electricity for instance, and most people are not aware it has happened. And the UK is not even using the cheapest forms of electricity production much (hydro because it doesn’t have the right topology, solar because of the high latitude, onshore wind because of population density and political decisions). Those renewable sources of electricity - solar, onshore wind and hydro - are now the cheapest way to produce electricity full stop, even ignoring the pollution externalities of the alternatives, and countries that have access to those resources do not need to sacrifice anything except a bit of technocratic hassle to get to a high level of renewable electricity. Getting to net zero carbon in total (including heating and transportation) would be expensive with current technology, but probably won’t be very expensive given the technological progress which can happen over the next 30 years, if we do the basic things right, follow a reasonable pathway, and give companies plenty of time to make investments and incremental progress. It’s highly likely electric vehicles will be cheaper over that timeframe, for instance. Your point is true, and it excuses a lack of pressure from the public, but it doesn’t excuse the media lying to their audience to gratify them. Nor representative politicians who are meant to use their own judgement remaining ignorant, and avoiding the boring technocratic steps necessary to help, or even just allow, the transition to take place.

makomk 7y ago
That depends exactly what we mean by "coal power subsidies". For example, the UK came under a lot of criticism recently for the scale of its subsidies for fossil fuel power, but if you look at the fine print the vast majority of those subsidies were the result of us having a lower rate of VAT on all domestic electricity and heating regardless of its source. Getting rid of that lower rate would put up the price of electricity for ordinary people across the board, no matter whether it was generated by clean or fossil sources.
- Robotbeat 7y ago
  That's a good point. And that could easily lead to a worse result. For instance, the cost of diesel in Germany is lower than in the UK but the price of electricity is significantly lower in the UK than in Germany, which basically punishes electric cars (which have significantly lower lifetime emissions per km than comparable diesel vehicles) in Germany while encouraging them in the UK. This is one thing we need to pay attention to as more and more of global emissions are transportation related instead of electricity related: punishing electricity production without also properly tariffing liquid fuels could backfire by discouraging electrification of transport.

teekert 7y ago

In "socialist" Netherlands where getting Cancer won't cost you a cent and we basically have Universal income (in the form of bijstand and various subsidies) most people still don't care (edit:) enough to do something with their own money.

davedx 7y ago
Then why are GroenLinks winning more seats with each election? I agree our government could and should have done more, starting quite a few years ago. We are behind on our commitments. But I don't think it's fair to say "most people still don't care". Many Dutchies I know do care. Some just don't know what they can really do to help, or can't afford to do the things that would help. Even putting solar panels on your roof (an effective and economical thing to do) is beyond the financial / living situation of most people. If we can just stop FvD's insane climate change denial that would probably help too...

natch 7y ago

Your post is spot on but (pardon my off topic comment) anyone who thinks they need 15k for preschool has not discovered parent coop nursery schools which are an order of magnitude cheaper, and awesome if not way more awesome due to parental involvement. >people have to room to spend more on Didn’t quite understand that part. More on topic, personally I’ve taken on some financial costs and gotten some hedonistic rewards by buying a Tesla. Maybe if people are rewarded for making moves in the right direction, that will help.

nerdponx 7y ago

I'm not going to go so far as to say this is by design, but it's certainly a convenient state of affairs for certain actors. For instance, it's long been known that fomenting racism is a great way to keep people busy/distracted while you implement whatever policy you want, or use said racism as a basis to justify that policy. Keeping people in a state of distracted stupidity is often good business.