If the government knows about those negative externalities, and chooses not to prevent or tax the behavior, but instead subsidizes that sector, how else would you describe it?
> "big government" and "big oil corporations" are mainly to blame for lackluster action
If one government takes action, those actions often get reversed within a few years. The issue isn't just one specific government; it's the system itself. Critics argue that neither capitalism nor communism can resolve this, but they're not the only systems possible.
The real culprits include the growth imperative in our financial system, politicians' focus on short-term actions at the expense of long-term vision, the slow adoption of renewable energy, and subsidies for harmful sectors decades after their impacts are known, etc.
We have only a few years/decades to reverse the effects of past actions; after that point, they'll become irreversible. We're in the overshoot for 50 years at this point, after all.
Blaming one political side or the other doesn't solve the issue. We must tackle problems like climate change, pollution, biodiversity loss, overfishing, inequality, and the need for Universal Basic Income/Services across multiple fronts.
We need a Great Reset/Rewrite; otherwise, we should brace for a Great Simplification.
> If the government knows about those negative externalities, and chooses not to prevent or tax the behavior, but instead subsidizes that sector, how else would you describe it?
E.g. as "negative externatilites that were not appropriately taxed".
Because "subsidies" implies tax dollars being spent to deteriorate the situation, while the reality is basically the reverse.
And it is VERY obvious that this doesn't simply happen because "big oil" did so much lobbying that the government misrepresents the will of the people-- voters were visible in favor of subsidies and lower fuel prices (especially blatant during Ukraine-price spikes in Europe).
Just picture running on a "100% fossil fuel taxation to be spent on improved public transport" platform-- what country you think would elect that right now? Much less re-elect...
> We have only a few years/decades to reverse the effects of past actions; after that point, they'll become irreversible.
I disagree with this viewpoint: I think long term consequences are already completely inevitable, any current and future actions are only gonna change the exact magnitude.
> I think long term consequences are already completely inevitable
Degradation vs. collapse. Collapse is still preventable, but the window is closing fast.
If we'd stop fossil fuels, reform agriculture and reforest what we can, we'd be able to reverse the warming and let biodiversity rebound. Continue for a few more decades, and the carrying capacity falls drastically.
I don't buy into that at all; massive waves of climate refugees, environmental disasters, loss of coastal urban space, economical crises: sure-- but collapse of civilization?! I simply don't see that happening, to me that appears like completely unfounded pessimism.
I was referring to the collapse (significant degradation) of the environmental carrying capacity. In such a scenario, our civilization would implode on its own.
It's a complex topic ... I only can give you a few links. The system we live in is very complex ... and as in every complex system even a minor error can cripple the system. Just remember how much damage to the economy was caused by just one ship blocking the Suez.
I don't think the system is able to handle large-scale agricultural failures, prolonged droughts or abrupt sea level rises. Everything seems to be changing more rapidly than predicted - from air and sea temperatures to thawing, droughts, biodiversity loss, etc.
If the government knows about those negative externalities, and chooses not to prevent or tax the behavior, but instead subsidizes that sector, how else would you describe it?
> "big government" and "big oil corporations" are mainly to blame for lackluster action
If one government takes action, those actions often get reversed within a few years. The issue isn't just one specific government; it's the system itself. Critics argue that neither capitalism nor communism can resolve this, but they're not the only systems possible.
The real culprits include the growth imperative in our financial system, politicians' focus on short-term actions at the expense of long-term vision, the slow adoption of renewable energy, and subsidies for harmful sectors decades after their impacts are known, etc.
We have only a few years/decades to reverse the effects of past actions; after that point, they'll become irreversible. We're in the overshoot for 50 years at this point, after all.
Blaming one political side or the other doesn't solve the issue. We must tackle problems like climate change, pollution, biodiversity loss, overfishing, inequality, and the need for Universal Basic Income/Services across multiple fronts.
We need a Great Reset/Rewrite; otherwise, we should brace for a Great Simplification.