The US government didn’t put a price tag on how much it was willing to pay to defeat Hitler, and it shouldn’t put a price tag on how much it’s willing to pay to mitigate climate change. Money should not be the determining factor in defeating an existential threat.

Apr 5, 2021 · 2:30 PM UTC

96
242
21
1,646
Replying to @marwilliamson
The problem is with climate we are not defeating an enemy we're erecting a totalitarian state where the government will dictate all we do, and have the power to punish if we do not comply....
Replying to @marwilliamson
This is why you are a joke
Replying to @marwilliamson
I thought you were gonna say China
Replying to @marwilliamson
The reactionaries in govt & finance know expansionary, Keynesian, MMT policies work and are possible, but only for military spending. They own/control the MIC, make huge profits and call it patriotism. So, must we wait till they own/control the green industry too?
Replying to @marwilliamson
Especially when the government gives subsidies to gas and oil, bloated Pentagon budget I could go on... And this is our planet people's lives Where in the hell are the priorities???
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
Stupid post there should be a cost benefit of any expenditure . The cost of lowering the projected planet temp vs the cost and benefit of adapting and raising the relative standard of wealth/living . The raising of billions out of poverty far outweighs lowering carbon
Replying to @marwilliamson
I’d pay anything to save our earth but we are beyond broke. There is no way this excessive printing of money is not going to get us. Nobody cares about balancing a budget anymore.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Don’t let @SirajAHashmi see this 👀
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
Animal agriculture is #1 cause of climate change. Money is not needed to shut down factory farms.
Replying to @marwilliamson
HAHAHA
GIF