Dean Baker is right: if we’re going to start making policy out of concern for the legacy we will leave to our children and grandchildren, then you have to address the probability that the planet will grow too warm to sustain life in vast areas of the map. Certainly that counts as an urgent priority more than whether actuarial budget projections pencil out thirty years into the future:
The political leadership, including the Washington press corps and punditry, were already intently ignoring the economic downturn that is still wreaking havoc on the lives of tens of millions of people across the country. Now, in the wake of the destruction from Hurricane Sandy, they will intensify their efforts to ignore global warming. After all, they want the country to focus on the debt – an issue that no one other than the elites views as a problem [...]
What is perhaps most infuriating about this crew is the claim that their efforts are somehow designed to benefit our children and grandchildren. This is bizarre for a number of reasons. First, while they do want to cut social security and Medicare for current retirees and those expecting to benefit from these programs in the near future, the biggest cuts in their plans will hit today’s young [...]
However, what’s even more bizarre regarding their generational equity logic is the idea that, somehow, the well-being of future generations can be measured in any way by the size of the government debt. This point should have been pounded home to even the thickest deficit hawk by Hurricane Sandy. What we do or don’t do in the next decade will have a huge impact on the climate conditions that our children and grandchildren experience.
Well put. And this is true EVEN IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET. Spending on sustainable programs like Social Security matters much less to that budget picture in 2040 than the impact of catastrophic climate change. Hurricane Sandy is projected to cost $50 billion. Imagine one or more of those types of weather events every year, in the midst of rising oceans that will only make the impact greater. Imagine the cost of resource wars as water becomes less potable and drought conditions magnify, destroying crops and making the basic human act of feeding ourselves less secure. The costs of unmitigated climate change are almost incalculable. Yet we’re taking our green eyeshades to focus on other matters.
The idle talk of incorporating a climate fee/carbon tax into the grand bargain negotiations makes me wince. Not because it would be the obvious thing to do, but because it’s so out of the realm of possibility. The elites cannot slow the boiling of the planet when the important work of lining up decades-long actuarial projections comes first.




26 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
This is extremely important. Rising ocean levels are a fact. That the rise is caused in part by warmer ocean temperatures is a fact. We cannot survive if acceptance of fact becomes optional, i.e., you don’t have to “believe” in global warming if you don’t want to. Just heard a wonderful talk by novelist Barbara Kingsolver last night, she blew my mind.
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors. We borrow it from our children. –Native American saying
Nah, that’s too easy.
I should really add to that that market-based allocation and conservationism are literally mutually exclusive. Put another way, you cannot simultaneously be pro-capitalism and pro-environment.
But once you acknowledge this fact, you have to posit an alternative to capitalism — which the left is loathe to do, for fear its coordinator-class privileges will be exposed. So the left continually tries to have it both ways. And then it chides working-class people for not being all enthusiastic about what it does.
thank you, sensei
Dave, maybe you could interview this person:
” Climate Action Tracker (CAT). CAT is an independent science-based assessment that tracks the emission commitments and actions of countries.
Limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius is not impossible, despite so many warnings, said Marion Vieweg, a policy analyst at CAT.
Vieweg is critical of the PwC report for simply using past carbon emission reductions as a guideline for what’s possible. “It is only with a coherent strategy of alternative energy sources, technologies, activities, net costs, benefits, etc. can one judge how feasible deep reductions are,” Vieweg told IPS. Such integrated studies have been done and they show the “required deep cuts are feasible and affordable”, she said.
Achieving these cuts, however, is gradually becoming more difficult as serious action continues to be delayed. It has never been a secret that the required reductions are unprecedented historically, she said. “What is important is to understand how to achieve them. And then do it.”
she’s commenting on this:
“A new international business report warns fossil fuel use is pushing humanity towards a catastrophic overheating of the planet, with temperature increases of four or even six degrees Celsius. No major developed or developing country is doing anything close to what’s needed to prevent large parts of the planet from becoming uninhabitable, the report found.
“This isn’t about shock tactics, it’s simple maths,” said Leo Johnson, partner of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited (PwC), one of the world’s largest accounting firms, which wrote the report.
“We’re heading into uncharted territory for the scale of transformation and technical innovations required” to reduce carbon emissions enough to prevent disaster, Johnson said.”
at
http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/11/mankind-approaching-carbon-cliff-report-warns/
Dawg bless Dean Baker and David Dayen.
Truth to power . . . simple as life and death.
The elites don’t care, THEIR children and grand children will likely be cared for . . . the hell with the masses.
And that’s why any ‘change’ from within the present system of governance, in US or world wide, is futile and meaningless.
There WILL be no changes for the masses, only the assurance that the elites and 1% will last longer than the rest of us.
How ya gonna change that shit, when they own and rule everything? Hint: Yer not.
However, it IS unsustainable, so we know the elites will also crumble at some point.
I don’t get much grim satisfaction outta that, either. I want better for the masses.
I have NO idea how to get ‘er done. Peacefully or violent, I can’t see it getting done. Only erosion and crumbling of empires can take its toll on the present global sitch of inequitable wealth and resources division and usage.
Per the UN’s mid estimate, another 3 billion (= 2 x China) will be added to world population by 2050.
Play with the math on that one (e.g a per capita CO2 cut of 30% leaves us in the same place in 2050 that we are now)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World-Population-1800-2100.svg
Damn Indians. Always ruining things for everybody. :-)
P.S. I’m 1/16 Cherokee.
Let’s not prematurely “rule out” some superior alien being coming down and showing us how to reverse all the negative effects, just in time.
‘Course, I’m not saying we should depend on that.
UK Guardian has straight science coverage of the newest projections from the U.S.’s very own NCAR showing models projecting greater global temperature rise by 2100 more accurately match observed changes in humidity and other real data.
National Academy of Sciences is warning the U.S. military that global climate change is a near-term (next decade) national security threat.
I figure we have about 20 years give or take a few. The feedback loops are already moving. Watch the oceans and get to a place that you sense might be habitable…and enjoy these last few decades of civilization!
I wish we had recently had the opportunity to elect a president who cares more about stopping climate change than about absurd deficit deals and cutting social programs.
This is a fine argument except for ignoring one major fact. Now I could be wrong, but are all the pups rich? In the top 10%? Because if not, the devaluation of our money is going to destroy the 90% in this nation while making the rest wealthy beyond their perverse dreams of avarice.
Our dollar is being destroyed by money printing. Your prices go up every week now, as the portions get smaller. People use payday loans for food knowing they can’t pay them back. Why should they care if their family is starving?You can’t blame anyone for feeding their family first and foremost.
But to embrace Dean Banker is to ignore the reality that is fast overtaking our economy. The debts can not be repaid, and we are getting close to borrowing half of our spending in advance. This is not sustainable without the ruin of every system in our nation.
So what you are glorifying and begging for is extreme poverty that will show up and destroy our nations long before the seawater rises to take out our coastal cities, leaving us with the inability to rebuild our infrastructure.
Your 1964 dime had gone up in value and has more purchasing power today, and more tomorrow. Every time more money is printed. It is worth more than 20x face value. Your dollar is down 20x and heading toward the basement.
Do we support debt jubilee or make serfs of everyone below the upper class? Dean won’t answer that question, nor will he address it. If you don’t play with the entire deck of cards, you don’t know what the odds are.
This dichotomy is unfathomable to anyone that can count and use basic arithmetic.
Tweeted. Recommended. Thanks DDay.
oldtree:
“So what you are glorifying and begging for is extreme poverty that will show up and destroy our nations long before the seawater rises to take out our coastal cities, leaving us with the inability to rebuild our infrastructure.”
Haven’t heard about hurricane Sandy I guess?
Nature trumps the economy every time. It cares nothing for human finances, plutocrats or slaves. At the atmospheric level all it seeks is equilibrium.
thank you david, also dean baker. this is right on, 1000 years of weather is being created now.
why do you resent that comment? seems pretty basic and standard to me.
thats pretty much the economists “innovation” fantasy right? That some undiscovered techonology always pops up just when we need it, and makes everything more efficient, and saves the day.
And they say they are the “realists”..sniff
if we restored the tax rates to what they were before boy bush (insanely) cut 700 billion, we would have no problem…but then we would have no problem, right? no manufactured “debt crisis” to scare you with and therefore no need to “save” social security and medicare by handing it over to wal street (privatisation)….BTW saving the economy by handing over to wal street is equivalent to saving flies by handing them over to bullfrogs.
I agree. The parties over. Industrialization has literally cooked our goose. The elites in the end will seize the high mt. valley’s where the last habitable land will exist. Russian Siberia will be a sub-tropical redoubt as well, but the dead Oceans and the extinction event that will spread to the land will end man’s reign on Earth. A few tens of thousands will however survive in the Tibetan plateau and the high Andes, maybe even other high mt. areas as well. Everything below 12K ft though will be cooked in 100 yrs or sooner.
On a scale so far beyond Sandy that it would be considered quaint. What did our country do for the victims of Katrina? Why did anyone care about Sandy? Because it was the status quo that was affected along with the poorest of us.
It isn’t going to be the status quo that will demand action on climate change, they haven’t bothered yet. They ignore it just like the financial crisis. No, they exacerbate it. That would interfere with their profits.
Talk is cheap.
Your dollar is evaporating. Your rent, food, energy and everything else is going up. Your money is worth less if you can even get a part time job. What follows extreme poverty for more millions?
entropy does not rest.
I could not disagree more that the greatest debt we are leaving our children is a climate debt. The climate is only a symptom and only one of many.
The greatest debt we are leaving our children is that we stood by while our system went from a two party system to a one party system, or, at best, a 1.2 party system.
Our current rate of inflation is 2%. What rate would suit you?