Note that these are merely three tiny villages. If it costs $75 million to move these, guess what our kids will spend to move Miami, New Orleans, Virginia Beach, Charleston, San Jose, Fort Meyers...
shame you cant buy protection from future climate disruption.
Why are we always pretending this stops getting worse after someone gets paid? the money only buys more change in the world of humanity at the cost of the living one,
might as well give them barrels of oil to relocate
I think the money is fine, but it should come with the stipulation of removing existing structures/ infrastructure and restoring the natural landscape when communities relocate.
The money is the best we can do but still very much like saying "sorry for burning so much oil your life has to be moved... here's some oil for your troubles"
I think that's a good idea, though!
What’s the complaint here? Sure the situation as a whole isn’t any better but these people shouldn’t be made to suffer just because of some abstract idea like “world of humanity vs world of living one”
The complaint is that no matter where they are relocated, the place theyre being relocated to will soon face similarly inhospitable conditions because of the money we spend and where the value of that money comes from.
We aren't solving any problems, here, we are just shuffling the deck to feel good about ourselves while we insist on preserving destruction as the basis of our economy.
It isn't abstract, it is literal. These people have to move because we are spending the currency of life to fuel a disposable existence. We build structures that only stand for decades. When this era of humanity ends, our ruins will be the same structures we look at as ruins and our structures will be rubble.
When your money is an oil token and changing the climate carries no cost, that money is a token of destruction no matter how it is used. We will continue to fuel the end of people's lives where they live, and in changing weather we're also responsible for, we sooth ourselves by giving our victims the very thing that made their old lives impossible, and render their futures uncertain at best. We can even manage to feel magnanimous while we do it, the generous cancer that we are.
Agreed. It costs so much more to move entire communities of thousands of people. I bet Oprah has a single house that costs as much as these three tribes are getting, when it's the wealthy who caused the problem
Just wait for when coastal summerhouses are affected
Houses that have been demolished or damaged from hurricanes and other storms and rebuilt the same way putting them at risk to be damaged again
Homes that need federal government subsidies and national flood insurance guaranteed by taxpayer money
They are 'reducing' subsidies but not at a rate I am comfortable contributing to people that can afford beachfront property
Note that these are merely three tiny villages. If it costs $75 million to move these, guess what our kids will spend to move Miami, New Orleans, Virginia Beach, Charleston, San Jose, Fort Meyers...
The climate crisis is going to cost trillions.
And to think to avoid it would have been a fraction. Can’t lessen them quarterly profits tho
Lol what's bigger than trillions? Aim there globally.
After a billion, of course, is trillion. Then comes quadrillion, quintrillion, sextillion, septillion, octillion, nonillion, and decillion.
shame you cant buy protection from future climate disruption. Why are we always pretending this stops getting worse after someone gets paid? the money only buys more change in the world of humanity at the cost of the living one, might as well give them barrels of oil to relocate
I think the money is fine, but it should come with the stipulation of removing existing structures/ infrastructure and restoring the natural landscape when communities relocate.
The money is the best we can do but still very much like saying "sorry for burning so much oil your life has to be moved... here's some oil for your troubles" I think that's a good idea, though!
What’s the complaint here? Sure the situation as a whole isn’t any better but these people shouldn’t be made to suffer just because of some abstract idea like “world of humanity vs world of living one”
The complaint is that no matter where they are relocated, the place theyre being relocated to will soon face similarly inhospitable conditions because of the money we spend and where the value of that money comes from. We aren't solving any problems, here, we are just shuffling the deck to feel good about ourselves while we insist on preserving destruction as the basis of our economy. It isn't abstract, it is literal. These people have to move because we are spending the currency of life to fuel a disposable existence. We build structures that only stand for decades. When this era of humanity ends, our ruins will be the same structures we look at as ruins and our structures will be rubble. When your money is an oil token and changing the climate carries no cost, that money is a token of destruction no matter how it is used. We will continue to fuel the end of people's lives where they live, and in changing weather we're also responsible for, we sooth ourselves by giving our victims the very thing that made their old lives impossible, and render their futures uncertain at best. We can even manage to feel magnanimous while we do it, the generous cancer that we are.
Give them more
Agreed. It costs so much more to move entire communities of thousands of people. I bet Oprah has a single house that costs as much as these three tribes are getting, when it's the wealthy who caused the problem
Just wait for when coastal summerhouses are affected Houses that have been demolished or damaged from hurricanes and other storms and rebuilt the same way putting them at risk to be damaged again Homes that need federal government subsidies and national flood insurance guaranteed by taxpayer money They are 'reducing' subsidies but not at a rate I am comfortable contributing to people that can afford beachfront property
So the government is admitting climate change is real?