Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (22646)	6/24/2017 7:57:32 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Recommended By TimF Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 355829

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. Don't know what I wrote that would provoke that response. I didn't say anything about how much to spend, merely noted that there is opportunity cost to each dollar spent on anything and there is always a marginal dollar. Money spent on global warming is not available to be spent on education or healthcare and vise versa. There comes a point where the last dollar doesn't buy you much here but might present better value there. we rarely make those sort of analyses on anything else. I didn't intend to suggest that the notions I expressed were unique to global warming. IMO we (the government) should be cognizant of opportunity cost and marginal value in all things short of attacks and disasters. We don't do it because we are allowed deficit spending and because too many people are innumerate and/or think that money grows on trees. And it's no fun to live on a budget. ( I personally have a distaste for budgeting. I've never done it as an adult on my own.)