4 ms·
On the other hand, if the economy grows at 3% per year, then humanity will be 12 times richer by 2100 than if the economy slows down to 2% growth due to heavy g
by ddxxdd 7y ago
On the other hand, if the economy grows at 3% per year, then humanity will be 12 times richer by 2100 than if the economy slows down to 2% growth due to heavy government interference.
Compounding interest and economic growth has been the primary driving force for lifting people out of poverty, and increased wealth can be used to build seawalls, sequester carbon, and implement climate control on a large scale.
There is still plenty of debate to be had about whether the economic growth from acclimation outweighs the potential climate benefits from mitigation.
- grive 7y agoThis is asinine, there is no "other hand" here. At +8C, most of humanity is dead. You can be "12 times richer", it won't save you or anyone else. > and increased wealth can be used to build seawalls, sequester carbon, and implement climate control on a large scale. This is fantasy. The elites having captured that much wealth will never give it up for free. Populations will have to take it from their dead hands, which is very costly. Rest assured: if the status quo is not moved, there will be violent uprising from people feeling the heat (figuratively: it will be water wars and famines). The economies will tank then, with or without mitigation in place.