dckingsfan wrote:A trillion here a trillion there - pretty soon it becomes real money. Eh - just ignore it - it will go away.
But won't somebody think about the economy?...
And the costs we're paying now are for failing to take action a couple decades ago when changes would have actually been cheaper. Now change is going to be way more expensive but the costs are going to be exponentially worse down the line if we do nothing.
And of course the immediate response is to point fingers at China for becoming the biggest polluter, ignoring the per capita aspect of the equation... and the fact that all those "lost jobs" that went to China were basically exporting the pollution that comes along with the production of things consumed by America, Europe, Canada, Australia, etc. and are just in large part outsourced pollution from established economies.
The depressingly hypocritical part about all of this is that taking aggressive action now on climate change would actually probably hurt the Chinese economy more over the long haul than tariffs and such because it would remove a lot of the market for goods that aren't environmentally friendly to consume in the quantities developed economies consume them, much of which is produced in China. Moreover, it would also allow for an economic advantage of being first in line with new technologies, which China is desperately trying to do right now despite also taking on the polluting production from other developed economies.
Basically, the only reason not to tackle climate change is fear of change and an unwillingness to take on the added effort and new ideas that change would entail. Instead we're just going to keep racking up the credit card bill and making payments that don't even come close to covering the interest and then explaining why we can't afford anything because of our crippling debt.