Originally posted by giblets
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Climate Change "Debate"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by giblets View PostThe top 0.1% have at least $20 trillion dollars in net worth, institute a 3% wealth tax and you get $600 billion a year
Leave a comment:
-
The top 0.1% have at least $20 trillion dollars in net worth, institute a 3% wealth tax and you get $600 billion a year
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by giblets View PostWe actually have legal authority to make the rich pay taxes unlike Mexico which is a sovereign country
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Aeson View Post
A lot less than it would cost not to do it.
Leave a comment:
-
We actually have legal authority to make the rich pay taxes unlike Mexico which is a sovereign country
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Kidicious View PostWe can't even balance the federal budget and you think we are going to be able to prevent that from happening? It's not going to happen without bankrupting the US. Do you have any idea what that would cost?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Proteus_MST View Post
You`ve got a point there.
Trying to prevent climate change might involve higher taxes for the rich, so it will encounter fierce opposition by the GOP
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Kidicious View PostWe can't even balance the federal budget and you think we are going to be able to prevent that from happening? ....
Trying to prevent climate change might involve higher taxes for the rich, so it will encounter fierce opposition by the GOP
Leave a comment:
-
We can't even balance the federal budget and you think we are going to be able to prevent that from happening? It's not going to happen without bankrupting the US. Do you have any idea what that would cost?
The Ds want free Healthcare, free college, free everything. It's just not happening.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Kidicious View PostThe wall is peanuts compared to that.
Including tens of millions people in the USA.
This will most likely be more costly than the costs of trying to prevent it (just think about havinbg to build totally new cities for the tens of misslions of people that get displaced in the USA ... and replacements for the industry that gets destroyed (for example the harbors facilities in those cities that will get flooded and need to be rebuilt somewhere else)
Also think about the economic opportunities that preventing the climate change offer:
For example the wind turbine and solar panel industry, or electric cars.
This is much more worth the investment than (like Trump does) supporting the coal industry
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Kidicious View Post
How much would it cost if that happened? Idk. It would have to be compared to whatever it would cost to prevent that and you even agree that we may not even be able to prevent it from happening. I really really don't think something like that can be prevented. That would be something like has never been done before. The closest thing would be the Marshall Plan.
Hey, lets do nothing against the flooding of all major population cednters on the coasts (and possibler vanishing of lots of inhabited islands, after all it may cost a lot of money
[/cyn]
I have to admit however, that this attitude if very fitting to todays Republican senators and representatives ...
the only time they don't shy away from costs is, when Trump hs one of his harebrained ideas (like the wall),
or when it comes to give tax cuts to themselves and their rich donorsLast edited by Proteus_MST; September 7, 2019, 02:49.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Berzerker View PostIf Greenland melts - and it is melting now - seas will rise 20-25 ft. That would cover much of Florida and numerous coastal cities around the world. How many trillions will be spent to relocate? If Antarctica melted too seas would rise over 200 ft, that would cover...well... game over, game over man. Volcanoes cool us off but their somewhat sporadic nature are more temporary than Milankovitch cycles which are currently more conducive to a prolonged warming trend. The irony is by cleaning up our GHGS we're pumping into the atmosphere we warm the world even faster. It may be too late to stop Greenland melting.
On the other hand ice ages would become less likely or reduced in their effect, all that water locked up in ice would rejoin the hydro cycle producing a wetter climate. We started warming the world long ago with slash and burn clearing practices and then with farming and animal domestication.
The Garden of Eden was destroyed by global warming, during the ice age the Persian Gulf was a river system and rising seas covered it about 8,000 years ago. All those people had to move and we know they did because many settlements appear around the current Gulf at that time. Imagine what it will cost for billions of people to move.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: