The report acknowledges that limiting global temperatures to 1.5℃ this century is now extremely difficult. Achieving net-zero global emissions by 2050 is the absolute minimum required to to avoid the worst climate impacts.
So join me in this struggle, it’s my final plea. I’ll die trying if I have to, for this better future is within reach, and it’s yearning to be set free.
Enables a sovereign government to spend whatever fiat currency is necessary to enable and assist its collective society to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
Not having a Green New Deal, however, could result in devastating cost-push (left finger) inflation.
What I am going to imagine here is an argument that a progressive politician (for example, someone associated with a new Biden administration) could make in support of direct government spending to address a serious challenge to our collective well-being. By “direct” government spending I imply spending which is not “paid for” by garnering either …
What if we told you that the most important thing you can do is help the people see that we can afford anything we need to take care of us all?
With clean energy tech evolving rapidly, the strangling grip of the fossil fuel industry on our economy never more obvious, and the ominous shadow of climate change bearing down on humanity, the time is prime for radical change.
Steve Keen, UCL While climate scientists warn that climate change could be catastrophic, economists such as 2018 Nobel prize winner William Nordhaus assert that it will be nowhere near as damaging. In a 2018 paper published after he was awarded the prize, Nordhaus claimed that 3°C of warming would reduce global GDP by just 2.1%, …
Nobel prize-winning economics of climate change is misleading and dangerous – here’s why Read More »
