You would have to acknowledge that plastics are subsidized in part because they are ubiquitous, absolutely essential to modern life, and will not be going away

You would have to acknowledge that plastics are subsidized in part because they are ubiquitous, absolutely essential to modern life, and will not be going away. You could also acknowledge that climate change science and climate change politics hold a rather different set of "beliefs", we can call them, the solutions offered are hardly the same and are not entirely justified in either case. Particularly when the known cost to humanity by effecting these solutions (bad) must be weighed against a possibility of a less desirable future based largely on statistical extrapolation. We might also say there has been a fair number of Chicken Littles wildly exclaiming this and every previous decade to be (/was?) our last on earth.