34 ms·
Give people resources so they can move to higher ground. Not just from rising sea levels, but more immediately from the increasing floods and storms that threat
by SubiculumCode 7y ago
Give people resources so they can move to higher ground. Not just from rising sea levels, but more immediately from the increasing floods and storms that threaten the flood plains where our most vulnerable reside.
edit: Fighting climate change and providing resources are not mutually exclusive policies, clearly. Both should be pursued, in my opinion.
- magicalhippo 7y agoBut they also have to be careful of mud/landslides, which could increase due to climate change.
- jxf 7y agoDoesn't that seem like an extremely temporary solution, at best? You can't outrun Nature — our best shot is to slow down fossil fuel emissions, contain the damage we've already done, and reverse what we can.
- SubiculumCode 7y agoObviously. We must do everything we can to combat climate change. This is absolutely critical. However, I do not see how providing resources to protect vulnerable populations means we do not fight climate change? They are not mutually exclusive policies. This reminds me of the misunderstanding of Andrew Yang's comments during the recent debate, who is a proponent of massively funding programs to fight climate change, but also believes that we need to help those that will most be affected by it.
- blimey74 7y agoI'd say a financial crisis is the least of our worries.
- jraines 7y agoIn the medium to long term, yes. At least compared to climate change. However, a financial crisis -- let's say of the scale of 2008 but which is unresponsive to government intervention (or said intervention is handcuffed due to geopolitical factors) could see the average person's life change dramatically in the course of weeks, rather than years or decades. Supply chains ground to a halt, shortages of fuel and basic goods, social unrest . . .
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]