Climate change is a stark reminder that humanity's greatest challenge is not in the will to live but in the wisdom to act beyond our own immediate desires, recognizing that the fate of the Earth is the fate of us all.🙃
And you can't change it!! Read the IPCC report from the United Nations thoroughly!! It doesn't support Whitehouse and his lies and bullshit!! As much as he rants about dark money, climate change is the biggest dark money scam in history!!
@@WalterDempsey-bj6ut The IPCC has to be screened by governments before it's published - it's not peer-reviewed science. The peer-reviewed science is much worse than the IPCC as James E. Hansen points out. the Aerosol Masking Effect and ocean inertia means it's locked in. Maybe we can do regenerative algae farming in the oceans or near oceans - that could sequester 50 gigatons per year as Sir David King and Raffael Jovine point out.
@@RobertL-f8u yes Professor David F. Noble's 1996 classic book "The Religion of Technology" explains how Platonic philosophy is a self-fulfilling apocalyptic religious worldview (as Christianity).
And passed a law that doesn't allow for workers to have any relief when working in high temperature conditions in the open. We can't allow those pesky peasants to just stop working when it's hot. Gotta make the moni.
@@danieltemple3144 Maybe instead of priests professors or politicians take a look at the science and data yourself. Maybe then you won't have to put it on the same shelf as religion, ideology and so on.
A price on carbon pollution (CO2 and methane) is the simplest and fastest and fairest way out of the mess we are in. Why can people not understand this???
@@Gator777 The carbon fee could be returned to the citizens of the US in equal distributions (i.e. not based on consumption). Thus those who produce little CO2 would profit, those who produce a lot of CO2 pollution would not profit. This would quickly change the behavior of CO2 polluters faster than any government regulation could do so.
@@Gator777 carbon tax is a way to slow down the capital coming into the fossil fuel industry and thus make it less profitable thus investors will move to green markets that are getting subsidies from carbon tax schemes. In other words - it's just a way to move the capital from one industry to another. In the end everyone profits becasue in the long run nothing changes in the markets and people get a cleaner environment. Might I remind you - global subsidies for the fossil fuel industry ar 7,1% GDP with 6% being explicit (like curing people out of air pollution ilnesses). So on top of that you will even save some of that 7,1% becaue explicit subsidies for green technologies won't be as high.
A price on carbon pollution (CO2 and methane) is the simplest and fastest and fairest way out of the mess we are in. Why can people not understand this???
@@mafarmerga Most people aren't economists and in general don't support simply moving money around. That is why I suggest the 1st thing a carbon tax should do is put money towards helping address costs where Global Warming causes damages or disasters.
@@pplr1 "That is why I suggest the 1st thing a carbon tax should do is put money towards helping address costs where Global Warming causes damages or disasters." That is certainly a nice idea and one that I support, but the reality is if we have any hope of implementing a carbon tax in the US it will HAVE to result in giving nearly all of that money back to US consumers. There is no way that Americans are generous enough to do as you suggest. We have to make it so that it is in their own self interests.
@@mafarmerga Thank you for supporting it. I think my suggestion would be less likely to fail if polled. People want taxes or whatever else to have a point. While a carbon tax does have a point my suggestion would help emphasize it. Plus a lot of damages caused by Global Warming happen inside the USA, so this would deal with situations in the US. That is within US self-interest.
@@pplr1 Citizens Climate Lobby has done polling as you suggest and I am sorry to say that most Americans are NOT interested in paying a carbon tax to help fix the problem. It is nice to think that they would, but in reality most people are a lot more selfish than you give them credit for. Only two things truly motivate behavior changes. Sex and money. Hence a carbon tax is our best option.
Sen Whitehouse picked up the baton and has consistently informed the senate, or the record anyway, which has helped move the needle away from the fad of “climate change denial” but still not quite far enough to make things more sustainable by default. Reactionary emergency management has never been good policy or effective humanitarian impacts, which is still the order of the day for companies resisting a shift at all just because they don’t want to invest in R&D because they need to keep those returns as high as possible for ???
When you have the fossil fuel industry against you, you need a huge popular movement fighting for action to get congress to act. So many congressmen are bought and paid for by the industry that they will actively fight against action to stop climate change unless they think they risk losing office, and even then, the paychecks waiting for them are still a big incentive. And 99% have no idea how rapidly things are going downhill. There are so many compounding risks now, it's really touch and go if we can stop the process at all now. For example, research shows that the AMOC - the giant Atlantic ocean current that moves heat from the tropics to the northern Atlantic is starting to weaken and sputter. And its a self sustaining system so as it weakens, it can quickly come to a tipping point where it abruptly stops. If it does, that sill completely reshape the weather globally, especially northern and Western Europe which will be up to 30C colder in the winter (like Canada basically) and also subject to far more extreme heat in the summer thanks to prevailing summer winds from the Sahara. There is no adapting to this. These places will be wrecked. And this could happen in the next 20-30 years. Though its not clear when because they system is becoming so unstable its hard to model. In any case, the scale of action required is like a WW2 mobilisation. Everything, everywhere, immediately,
> The fossil fuel interests have blocked a carbon tax. Wall Street oil & gas investors have blocked a carbon tax. -> An example where the pricing effect of a carbon tax is more important than the tariff/revenue effects: Six years ago, Dr. Tom Jaramillo (a young chemistry professor or post grad at Stanford U) gave a video presentation in which he discussed his approach to synthesizing chemicals that the fossil industry markets: He seized on some obscure diene (diolefin, alkadiene), because it was very expensive. I don't know how that worked out. However, a carbon tax would make somewhat more expensive synthetic versions of chemicals competitive with the legacy fossil versions ... and aspirant young chemists might be incentivized to fabricate common compounds, like methanol, methane, ammonia or hydrogen.
I reached $100k last quarter, which felt good but anticlimactic. You still keep working, saving and making good choices in an unstable economic environment. However, despite market gains, my portfolio has seeing great decline. I'm looking to improve it and maximize returns.
Everyone needs a Margin of Safety in their portfolios. While I can't offer personalized advice, consulting a fiduciary advisor is crucial for sound portfolio restructuring.
De-risk your portfolios, shore up your core holdings, and take some profits while balancing your portfolio allocations. I have been investing for 11 years, 5 with a financial advisor, I've achieved a 10x return compared to DIY efforts, totaling nearly $2m ROI. My best yet.
She's known as *Leah* *Foster* *Alderman* One of the finest portfolio managers in the field also widely recognized. Just research the name. You’d find necessary details to work with and set up an appointment.
Who owns the Arctic ice? Well it will be gone soon so I guess no one. That's the air conditioner of the planet but the natural co2 emission rate is 12 gigatons per 200 years. Human industry is kicking out 1000 to 5000 gigatons per 200 years. oops!!
This Guy would be crying like a Baby if you took his food , air conditioning , heat , transportation , etc etc that's from gas oil and coal. He looks like He lives pretty large to me
Oh yeah. for sure! taxing carbon emissions will work! And then you add amendments and adjustments and crooked dealings in carbon tax credits and you get a carbon tax system that looks like our income tax system. Just as billionaires pay nothing, the largest carbon emitters will pay nothing and will get around rules to limit emissions. Come on! Sheldon! I expected better of you!
There is no "mal information" in this clip. It's useless and rhetorical to only effecting the mass population, while listing no accountability to the blessing of the fossil fuel industry from the past. Theatre. We should take care of our neighbors.
oh please.....................get educated and grow up....this is striking financial control narratives...once again....history repeats itself...over and over for millions of years.....
...yet nothing will be done. Don't worry anymore just hop in yer F-350 quadcab™ and go shopping! Please pass the organic marmalade and vegan butter because we are toast.
Yeah I heard that claim. Funny thing is that heatwaves, droughts, and floods can each be bad for crops to. And even if they are not they can certainly be bad for humans.
@@thomasmartin406 You are the only one claiming "we never had floods, heatwaves, droughts before". That is putting your lie in someone else's mouth. Each of those is getting worse due to Global Warming. Within the last couple weeks heat records were broken in many places. If things were not changing so many places would not have gotten so hot.
I don't want tax dollars to cover Rick Scott's mansion anyway. That said even without government changes insurers are leaving Florida. So DeSantis is trying to use State government replace them.
I strongly suggest you read reports on the condition of the Florida home insurance market from the past week. A few years ago, reputable home insurers began to flee Florida. On Long Island (outside NYC), after hurricane Gloria passed over in 1987, insurance policies for coastal locations became less available. This issue will affect most residents of coastal areas on East coast south of Maine, most of the Gulf coast, and some locations along the Pacific coast, and Alaska as well.
Actually Joseph Fourier was woke two hundred years ago when he published that "the effects of human industry" would heat up Earth! Fourier be the most woke scientist of all time. hahahaha
