My concern is for the planet. The US is by far the largest contributor to climate change if you account for the additional emissions from US manufacturing in China. We can’t afford this move backwards.
Meh. The U.S. probably are also going to be one of the most affected and if Trump enacts all his economic ideas, the U.S. Economy will tank HARD, meaning the contribution to climate change will shrink regardless.
Increasing dependency on cheaply made imported goods only increases the emissions from production by nations with lower regulations. Couple that with emissions from increased trade, and I’m not as sure that economic hardship would reduce the US footprint in a noticeable way.
That’s a valid point, but i think it’s mute. There are pretty much two options, soviet, planned economic style or further open capitalism. The U.S. doesn’t have all resources and the world moves on without the U.S. if it has to. Not only that: Most of the innovation comes from progressive states. If those people just pack up and go somewhere else, things are looking rather bleak for increasing trade. So if there’s nobody to be able to pay for it and nobody to design it…things aren’t going to increase anything, they are going to decrease “all around”.
My concern is for the planet. The US is by far the largest contributor to climate change if you account for the additional emissions from US manufacturing in China. We can’t afford this move backwards.
Earth will be just fine.
Right? Its just that biological, carbon-based shit on it that’s gonna get cooked. This old rock is gonna be just fine. 🥹
True. I meant most life. The planet will balance itself once we’re all dead.
That is why they said “we”
Meh. The U.S. probably are also going to be one of the most affected and if Trump enacts all his economic ideas, the U.S. Economy will tank HARD, meaning the contribution to climate change will shrink regardless.
Increasing dependency on cheaply made imported goods only increases the emissions from production by nations with lower regulations. Couple that with emissions from increased trade, and I’m not as sure that economic hardship would reduce the US footprint in a noticeable way.
That’s a valid point, but i think it’s mute. There are pretty much two options, soviet, planned economic style or further open capitalism. The U.S. doesn’t have all resources and the world moves on without the U.S. if it has to. Not only that: Most of the innovation comes from progressive states. If those people just pack up and go somewhere else, things are looking rather bleak for increasing trade. So if there’s nobody to be able to pay for it and nobody to design it…things aren’t going to increase anything, they are going to decrease “all around”.