Anonymous
Anonymous asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 1 year ago

Is it merely a coincidence that everyone pretending there's no climate emergency tends to be a free market fundamentalist?

16 Answers

Relevance
  • Dirac
    Lv 4
    1 year ago
    Favorite Answer

    No, I don't think so.

    I asked a similar question along those lines a few months ago: "Hypothetically, what would be the conservative/libertarian way of quickly switching away from fossil fuels?" and those people that were the most anti-government free marketeers simply had no answer.

    I think a solution could be found that emphasized free market principles as much as possible, but the free market people here found it easier to claim there was no problem than to try to formulate a solution. They would rail against higher taxes or government regulations, but simply could not come up with any actual solution.

    What our society needs to do is to move beyond denying what is obviously a problem and start thinking about what solution we can find that will cause the least disruption, but the science deniers do not want the discussion to progress that far, so instead they lie about the science.

    • ...Show all comments
    • Dirac
      Lv 4
      1 year agoReport

      There are already lots of people making money off of it (e.g. Elon Musk), but a change like this disrupts the well-entrenched establishment, so those that have been making money for decades off fossil fuels try to resist and spread misinformation.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    When there is nothing that can be done in the short term it is not an emergency.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    OK, so there is an emergency. What are you going to do about it?

    We could reduce the number of single-use, plastic straws in use. We could minimise the number of journeys we make in our cars. We could put solar panels on the roof. We could cut down on the number of showers we take and so on.

    Let's cut to the chase and look at the big picture. If the US achieved perfection and produced no CO2 emissions at all, the rest of the world would mean that in about twelve years time we, the world, would be right back on the same track as now.

    If we can only cut down by about 10% then we only save the world about a year.

    The problem really is that if we cannot find a way of reducing everyone's emissions there does not seem to be much point further reducing our own. OK, every little helps but nothing like enough to make a difference.

    Attachment image
    • ...Show all comments
    • Dirac
      Lv 4
      1 year agoReport

      If we do nothing then 7 billion people will be profoundly disadvantaged. And evidence of any sort of "profound disadvantage" by addressing climate change is nonexistent.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Cowboy
    Lv 6
    1 year ago

    yep - they're all hypnotized; a classic case of cognitive dissonance has them all paralyzed.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 year ago

    LOL. Is this like Dump's "emergency" about the border wall? Sure, anything you now want to expand government is an "emergency."

    You progs are just as bad as Dump and some of the neo-cons he hired.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 year ago

    How can you have a free market when, for the last century or so, nations have used taxpayers' money to form public-private partnerships to extract, refine, and deliver fossil fuels, generating multi-billion dollar companies in the process, who wield huge power over those same nations and their political systems, and now possess a virtual monopoly on means of energy production?

  • sam
    Lv 6
    1 year ago

    no. greed over science

  • Anonymous
    1 year ago

    No it's no coincidence. People who want a free country don't fall for hoaxes designed to take their freedom.

  • Anonymous
    1 year ago

    It’s funny how only socialists think taxing the rich and giving themselves free income will somehow solve climate issues.

    • ...Show all comments
    • Dirac
      Lv 4
      1 year agoReport

      That's stupid Mike, that's like saying that getting rid of oncologists will prevent cancer. Besides, climate scientists will warn about the problem whether they're funded or not. I have never been paid to work on it and yet I will tell you that it's a huge problem.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Satan
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    It depends on what you term 'climate emergency'

    If I think that the Earth does change weather, and that it would be nigh impossible to control the weather currently, OR that we should not tamper with Mother Nature's weather, then does that make me a "free market fundamentalist"?

    • Climate Realist
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      It is the use of fossil fuels that is tampering. Clean energy does not change the "weather" but it does not interfere with climate the way that fossil fuels do.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.