3 ms·
As a counterpoint, consider this quote from an article [1] by economist Robert Murphy: "In the climate change debate, people often forget that under all but the
by dpatru 7y ago
As a counterpoint, consider this quote from an article [1] by economist Robert Murphy: "In the climate change debate, people often forget that under all but the most catastrophic scenarios, the future generations who will benefit from our current mitigation efforts will be much richer than we are. For example, Nigel Lawson points out that even under one of the worst case scenarios studied by the IPCC, failure to act would simply mean that people in the developing world would be “only” 8.5 times as wealthy a century from now, compared to 9.5 times as wealthy if there were no climate change. [2]"
[1] https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2009/Murphyclimate.html https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2009/Murphyclimate....
[2] Nigel Lawson, An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming (New York: Duckworth Overlook, 2008), p. 36.
- throwaway5752 7y agoNigel Lawson the politician and noted liar and misleader? That Nigel Lawson? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/oct/21/lord-lawson-global-warming-errors https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/oct/21/lord-law...
- esotericn 7y agoWealth? What is this "wealth" you speak of? Can you eat money? Do all the technological advances, smartphones, VR, blah blah, counteract killing off the megafauna, turning the natural landscape into deserts and concrete? Pure insanity.