3 ms·

context: I lived in Australia for a few years in South Australia. There was talk of building one, maybe two desalinization plants near Adelaide. I think the co

context: I lived in Australia for a few years in South Australia. There was talk of building one, maybe two desalinization plants near Adelaide. I think the consensus across the board is "yup, it does, and it would help massively" though it always came down to money and how it was going to get funded. Side tangent: I cannot for the life of me understand the argument for "well, yeah, climate change is bad, but let's think how much this might cost to fix...". When it comes to existential threats to our mere existence, how is cost a factor? Talk about the definition of short sighted! And more, it's super short sighted on the money aspect too. We make changes to what is acceptable, how we do things, and yeah, it might cost a ton to begin, but we all know from history that amazing amounts of money are to be made in those revolutions too. This is not a zero sum game.

thehappypm 7y ago
Being honest, there is a certain amount of privilege baked into this mindset. Not everyone is a software engineer with RSUs and a six-figure income. For many individuals and many communities, every dollar matters and increasing taxes to square off against a massive, but global and impersonal, existential threat is simply not something that everyone can get behind.
- timberfields 7y ago
  Really? You think this is about individual mindset? It's about governments and governments around the world. And about the future of our race and planet. Money should not stop us from tackling existential threats to everything we know and hold dear.
  - jfim 7y ago
    As much as I agree with your statement, the parent is arguing that climate change is a diffuse threat that's not immediately visible. Just like underfunding pensions will lead to possible issues later but we get money to spend now, or eating the seed corn instead of planting it. It's not sustainable, but our political and economical systems are structured in such a way that we sacrifice long term sustainability for short term gains, such as getting reelected for a four year term or making the quarterly goals.

thehappypm 7y ago

Being honest, there is a certain amount of privilege baked into this mindset. Not everyone is a software engineer with RSUs and a six-figure income. For many individuals and many communities, every dollar matters and increasing taxes to square off against a massive, but global and impersonal, existential threat is simply not something that everyone can get behind.

timberfields 7y ago
Really? You think this is about individual mindset? It's about governments and governments around the world. And about the future of our race and planet. Money should not stop us from tackling existential threats to everything we know and hold dear.
- jfim 7y ago
  As much as I agree with your statement, the parent is arguing that climate change is a diffuse threat that's not immediately visible. Just like underfunding pensions will lead to possible issues later but we get money to spend now, or eating the seed corn instead of planting it. It's not sustainable, but our political and economical systems are structured in such a way that we sacrifice long term sustainability for short term gains, such as getting reelected for a four year term or making the quarterly goals.