SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (22230)6/24/2017 7:17:11 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) of 355830
 
I am sorry. The idea that it would be so expensive to make the steps to combat climate change that the global economy would be irreparably harmed is fear-mongering. No one but climate change deniers are proposing spending anything like that kind of money.

As to your points, those are valid considerations. However, we rarely make those sort of analyses on anything else. We have spent more money in the Middle East to secure oil supplies since the Arab Embargo in the 1970s than we would have spent subsidizing alternatives and becoming energy independent. Which would have resulted in a much smaller carbon footprint to boot.

But we spent the money to prop up despots in the ME and then spent even more going to war against them. Where was the cost analysis there?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News