Let's say man made global warming is real....?

Question

Let's say for argument's sake that man made global warming is fact. It's coming if we continue our evil capitalist ways.

To prevent it will cost trillions. Is it worth it?

I mean if we are spending trillions to prevent it, wouldn't those trillions be better spent on things like making sure poor countries have clean water, advanced farming techniques, information technology, good sanitation and medical care and more reliable energy?

Seems to me a whole lot more people would benefit in the long run, and also as those nations become more prosperous, each would be able to deal with the effects of global warming easier.

Maybe the best solution is not to grind our economies to a halt, but to invest the money into making more of the world prosperous and better able to take care of themselves for any eventuality.

Answer 1

Is it worth it? Is trying to save the planet worth it? Only if you want to save nearly every living thing on this little blue ball we call earth.

Helping the poorer countries has been going on for DECADES. The problem is corrupt governments. Just look at the first Live Aid concert for an example. That generated Millions for the poor in Africa, but the governments took the food, and the money and did almost nothing with it to help the people.

Global warming needs to be confronted by the main culprits for creating the pollution, namely, the United States and China.

There will always be work that needs doing to help the poor, just as there will always be greedy people and governments in the world.

The only way to eradicate hunger, is to eradicate corruption.

Answer 2

The thing is, it won't cost trillions. We have already spent more than a trillion in an unsuccessful attempt to secure Iraq's oil. We KNOW the end of oil is coming and sooner or later we're going to spend money developing alternatives. We could have spent THIS money on that and not had to kill hundreds of thousands of people, and then fail anyway.

We in the US could be first with this technology and lead the world. Al Gore talks about this in one of his books. Instead the EU and Japan will own the technology because their governments are not corrupted by oil interest.

Our capitalistic culture in the US is fascinated by the short term but has no picture of the long term. We care about the next election, the next quarterly report. We have no idea of how the world will be in 50 years or 100 years. The Japanese plan for 100 years, and that's been working out for them very well!

Answer 3

There is not a single piece of evidence that it is a scam. None. Nor is there a single institution that does climatology research that believes it is incorrect. Not one. Nor is there any other explanation for the extremely rapid rate of warming over the past 100 years, a rate that the earth has never before experienced. The reason that nobody important pays any attention to the doubters, is because nobody has been able to provide an alternative explanation for the observed climate changes. Nobody.

Answer 4

well... some things will need to be changed... and they will cost money...

I'm not sure about trillions exactly...

I don't really get how the two ideas you're presenting are connected?

you're talking about global warming one mintue.. .then sharing technology with poor nations the next?

you seem to be saying "let's ignore global warming and worry about these other problems right now"... but the problem is, we don't know how fast it's progressing exactly and if it will speed up... if it does, farming techniques and clean water may be the least of our problems...

the major problems seem to be in heavily industrialized nations?

Answer 5

A recent study by the University of Maryland (UMD) found that taking no action at all is the USA's most expensive policy option with regards to global warming.

I have a discussion of this study here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Akex_vnxfhJ0mRUv3jNNOv3ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071019104255AATLfpC

Therefore the answer is yes, it's worth it.

Answer 6

Since the conservative leaders who object to the idea of climate change are also the people who oppose increased foreign aid, it won't happen until some more liberal leaders are elected. Since those leaders are aware of climate change and support increased foreign aid, both would happen.

This is not a chicken and egg argument anyway. Decreasing our pollution levels must be accompanied by increased sustainability. One without the other is pointless.

Answer 7

We are assuming that global warming is real CORRECT??? and if so, if what has been said about it is TRUE and in this scenerio we are assuming it IS true, then if we don't continue to try to STOP it, no countries will have to worry about clean water or advanced farming techniques becaue there will be NO EARTH LEFT.... (IF GLOBAL WARMING ISN'T STOPPED---if its real)....

Answer 8

Yes.
The average temperature has risen 1.06 degrees in the last 100 years.
We should shut down all factories in the world, and ban all vehicles.

However, the Environmentalists like Al Gore still need their Private Jets & Limos.

Answer 9

Maybe the best solution is stopping the problem rather than treating the symptoms. If someone has a brain tumor you don't give them painkillers for the headache. You take it out, if it's not too late, which is we need to do.

Answer 10

Evil capitalist ways? You sound like Hillary! lol