General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhistling past the graveyard on climate change and sea level rise
And even in its most ideal form, the logic "free market solutions" is predicated on companies getting punished by angry consumers if they don't do the right thing. There are all sorts of things wrong with this approach, of course: if a bunch of people die due to food poisoning, it's not as if it's always easy to identify where in the production chain the problem occurred, or which corporations to punish by not buying their product (not to mention the obvious fact that the deaths should have been stopped by regulation and oversight in the first place.) But in its most simplistic form it might work if the impact of corporate malfeasance is immediate.
But how does a "free market solution" work when it comes to carbon emissions? Whom do consumers punish? Whom do consumers reward? On what timescale? By the time the problem is advanced enough to penetrate consumer consciousness, it will have been far, far too late for the market to change organically.
And that's, as I've said before, why climate change is such a threat to the conservative enterprise. It's not just that big energy interests would be impacted. It's that the entire conservative model of problem solving would be rendered obsolete if the realities of climate change were accepted in our public discourse.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/whistling-past-graveyard-on-climate.html
immoderate
(20,885 posts)They swing between "the market will take care of it," and "it's a socialist hoax." No government solution may be considered.
Unfortunately, calling them names does not solve the problem.
--imm
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)If every time one of these fucking clowns spouted their bullshit they were laughed at and called clowns there might be some progress.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
jimlup
(7,968 posts)They still want to slip back but at least they become conscious of the causes and basic nature of the problem.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I can get them to sometimes acknowledge the existence of climate change. But not that anything can or should be done about it.
I am dealing with some extreme true believers. They cannot accept ideas which require government action beyond protecting capitalists.
It's a hobby.
--imm
jimlup
(7,968 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Granted they were lifelong rural residents who may not have been able to grasp the science with both hands but were able to see the effects on the land they've known and loved. The very rapid loss of animals, trees and plants indigenous to the area. The drying up of the once year round streams and creeks. The more violent and unpredictable weather patterns. You can easily befuddle a man locked in a steel highrise all day but when they have a connection to the land they need little prodding to identify a problem.
Even then though its a tough call. Most people would probably like to think they actually left this world better in some way when they passed. They were a great industrialist, a great developer, a great investor. All things that in the past actually enshrined people as our most laudable citizens. All things now that only leave the planet more desolate and hopeless for those to come. Not a pleasant reality for some to cope with. Much better to wallow in the warmth and familiarity of ignorance.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)This is the sort of elephant in the room that no one seems to see.
We decrease population by NOT HAVING children.
We stop carbon emissions by not jumping in our cars. By not getting on planes and flying to our vacations.
The problem with this problem is that the solution entails doing nothing.
And this is why we will not solve it.
librechik
(30,678 posts)which they love, let's face it.
http://articles.marketwatch.com/2011-09-09/commentary/30750008_1_climate-change-climate-research-community-global-warming