Live data from Hacker News

Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

mleverything.substack.com

31–40 of 150 posts

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#31

The problem with this post is that it cites a survey of how much Americans are willing to pay to "stop climate change." According to the article 57% are willing to pay $1 a month to "stop climate change" and 23% would pay $40 a month. As an American, in a well paying IT job, I'd pay $100 IF IT WOULD STOP CLIMATE CHANGE. However, I don't believe the $1, or $40, or $100 is going to do anything. It's far more complex th…

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm very worried about climate change, and I would be willing to make any number of sacrifices to _effectively_ combat climate change. However, the question is this:

> _Suppose a proposal was on the ballot next year to add a monthly fee to consumers’ monthly electricity bill to combat climate change. If this proposal passes, it would cost your household $10 every month. Would you vote in favor of this monthly fee to combat climate change, or would you vote against this monthly fee?_

My utility company can barely run their billing website. Paying them $40 a month to "combat climate change" sounds like throwing money into a hole. So no, I wouldn't do that.

Would I vote for legislation that would redirect subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy sources? Yes! Would I vote for legislation that would place limitations on the production of plastics, even if it meant raising the price of consumer goods? Probably!

I know, I know, there's complexity in these issues, but my point is that I'd be willing to pay more to combat climate change. I'm just picky about who I'm paying it to, whether the costs will be distributed justly, and what they plan to do with that money.

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#33
post #5

Americans pay many fees and taxes that go to environmental concerns. They also see the government does not use that revenue to address those environmental concerns, because instead it goes to state and federal pensions. Therefore, the real issue is, what do Americans have to do to get the government to spend the money on the things they say it is supposed to go to? Until the government is willing to change their spen…

“Americans pay many fees and taxes that go to environmental concerns”

Doubt. Environmentalism is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of US governmental spending.

Edit: it’s .2% of the budget. Defense is a whopping 14%. We spend 70 times less on environmentalism than military and we’re not even at war. Source: http://saveepaalums.info/EPA+costs+to+taxpayers

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#34
post #7
post #2

What a shitty post. I guess I don't believe in climate change after all unless I also believe in public losses for privatized gains. Corporations raked in billions while wrecking the environment and I'm sure they all love framing this as an individual responsibility that we're all "failing" to do.

> In February 2019, the center-right American Action Forum, estimated that the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade [0] Take the low estimate of $51 trillion over a decade so $5 trillion per year. > The top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data last updated Oct. 19, 2020 So if you seize all the wealth of the top 1% you'll pay for ~7 yea…

Personally I tend to be skeptical of anything that discusses nationality at all when it comes to climate change, unless we can somehow move all of the pollution outside the environment (into another environment)

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#36
post #7
post #2

What a shitty post. I guess I don't believe in climate change after all unless I also believe in public losses for privatized gains. Corporations raked in billions while wrecking the environment and I'm sure they all love framing this as an individual responsibility that we're all "failing" to do.

> In February 2019, the center-right American Action Forum, estimated that the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade [0] Take the low estimate of $51 trillion over a decade so $5 trillion per year. > The top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data last updated Oct. 19, 2020 So if you seize all the wealth of the top 1% you'll pay for ~7 yea…

The American Action Forum is nowhere close to “center-right”, only they call themselves that. It is a conservative think tank that almost exclusively works for Republicans.

Their figures aren’t even in “let’s debate” realm. They cite $36 trillion just for universal healthcare when even the CBO admits that Medicare for All would save $300-600 billion per year. This is nowhere close to good faith accounting, it’s intentionally misleading

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#38
post #7
post #2

What a shitty post. I guess I don't believe in climate change after all unless I also believe in public losses for privatized gains. Corporations raked in billions while wrecking the environment and I'm sure they all love framing this as an individual responsibility that we're all "failing" to do.

> In February 2019, the center-right American Action Forum, estimated that the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade [0] Take the low estimate of $51 trillion over a decade so $5 trillion per year. > The top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion, according to Federal Reserve data last updated Oct. 19, 2020 So if you seize all the wealth of the top 1% you'll pay for ~7 yea…

> $51–$93 trillion over the next decade

About right when you spend $1280 on a coffee cup: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-air-force-spent-1280-on-c...

Re: Americans aren't willing to pay to stop climate change

#40
post #19

For these numbers to say anything about lack of interest in combating climate change. We would also need to know what people would answer if you switched out climate change with some other worthwhile cause. How many would want to pay 40$ for better firefighters, solve structural racism, water security in western states, or military veterans? Without something to compare it with, there is no context to say if the numb…

There. The federal government has been blowing billions in Afghanistan, I'm sure they can try to use it on something else instead of levying more taxes from me and my coworkers.

I always say, if you're going to invest in fixing a foreign country, start with Mexico.
Post reply on HN