This piece portrays climate change as a transactional proposition, one that must provide an almost immediate benefit from the investment in combatting carbon emissions. That's a false premise to say the least. The benefit to workers (and everyone else for that matter) is the prospect of enhanced quality of life for themselves and future …
This piece portrays climate change as a transactional proposition, one that must provide an almost immediate benefit from the investment in combatting carbon emissions. That's a false premise to say the least. The benefit to workers (and everyone else for that matter) is the prospect of enhanced quality of life for themselves and future generations. Reforming the world's carbon-based economies from the past hundred years will require substantial investments that will yield dividends that many of us may not live to see. Also, any high school essay writer can cherry-pick climate predictions to support their narrative, but the vast majority of scientific predictions on the gradual disaster of climate change have been accurate, and we're seeing the evidence unfold around the world. The longer we take to confront this pattern, the more it will take to fix it.
It takes political courage to tell voters that saving our planet will take investment and sacrifice. There won't be an immediate payoff for voters in meeting this challenge; so many voters are focused on making a better life for themselves and their families today -- the climate change threat (if they haven't been misled to dismiss it as folly) seems so far away. For the most part, conservative elected officials are pandering to these voters, promising to champion near-term payoffs without the costly investment in fighting climate change. For the sake of winning their next election, these politicians are kicking the climate disaster can down the road again.
This piece portrays climate change as a transactional proposition, one that must provide an almost immediate benefit from the investment in combatting carbon emissions. That's a false premise to say the least. The benefit to workers (and everyone else for that matter) is the prospect of enhanced quality of life for themselves and future generations. Reforming the world's carbon-based economies from the past hundred years will require substantial investments that will yield dividends that many of us may not live to see. Also, any high school essay writer can cherry-pick climate predictions to support their narrative, but the vast majority of scientific predictions on the gradual disaster of climate change have been accurate, and we're seeing the evidence unfold around the world. The longer we take to confront this pattern, the more it will take to fix it.
It takes political courage to tell voters that saving our planet will take investment and sacrifice. There won't be an immediate payoff for voters in meeting this challenge; so many voters are focused on making a better life for themselves and their families today -- the climate change threat (if they haven't been misled to dismiss it as folly) seems so far away. For the most part, conservative elected officials are pandering to these voters, promising to champion near-term payoffs without the costly investment in fighting climate change. For the sake of winning their next election, these politicians are kicking the climate disaster can down the road again.
Again, how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere?