Wednesday, April 12, 2006

We're all in the hot seat

Do you think about the impact that global warming might have on your finances? I do.
There are certainly multiple ways of looking at it: in 30 years, I may have a waterfront home-- or, I could have an uninhabitable, underwater home. Beachfront property may be a bargain in the future.
If you look at where things are headed-- and they ARE headed there if things don't change-- it's pretty scary. Climate change will cost us trillions of dollars someday, so why are we so reluctant to spend some money now to avert it?

9 comments:

easy e said...

We didn't cause global warming. It is Earth's natural cycle. Where do you think the ice ages came from? How did the ice ever melt? I don't think it was human polution. For us to look at 100 years of recorded temperatures, and call that global warming, is a bunch of bull. How many years has the Earth been here? My thought is that the Earth knows a hell of a lot more than we do about taking care of its self.

Anonymous said...

global warming is a concocted industry. there was a recent study that the mean temperature cooled slightly for for the period 1998-2005. may sound like a short period, however, the treehuggers would have us think that the slight warming between 1895-2006 dictates a trend in a planet which has exited for four billion years. and what does this have to do with personal finance. if you start spouting off ultraliberal crap i wont read this blog any more. i read it for personal finance bs, not political stuff.

jtc said...

I worry that the species of humans that live in the hollow center of the Earth will come out here to the outer layer and take over thus making my 401K worthless...

Global warming is a sham. Don't be a sucker. You seem way too smart for that.

inagm said...

because we humans are short-sighted creatures who also don't plan for retirement and don't spend enough on education.

Madame X said...

I won't be using this blog to deeply explore the issue of global warming, but I think it is something people should inform themselves about, via scientists, not politicians or business leaders.
As for the financial side of things, anyone who has a long-term stake in property values, agriculture, public health, the insurance industry, the energy industry, transportation and the global economy in general should think about how this issue might affect them and their investments.

optioned unarmed said...

At this point, it seems to me that any non-scientist who insists that global warming is real, or who insists that global warming is not real, is being closed-minded. The debate over global warming by non-scientists kind of reminds me about my neighbors' attitudes towards house price appreciation. They insist home prices will rise this year, but if you ask them what will happen to the stock or bond or currency markets, or inflation or interest rates, they give you a blank look.

JMULLI10 said...

Wow, they are really getting on you for your global warming views. You even started out asking the question. I am probably partial, working in auto industry, but I don't think there is enough evidence that global warming is really as bad as certain groups claim. There isn't enough data to filter out the man effect vs. the natural cycle effect. I remember in school they told us that Michigan was covered with ice glaciers. Clearly, we weren't around to cause those glaciers to melt and they did.

We do need to do more on the enviroment though. I can't believe all the stories about raw sewage or companies still dumping into rivers. We still to need to work improving all other emission sources too, including cars and trucks. Unfortunately, a lot of pollution is a result of the huge population growth in the world now. There is no way to fix that part of the equation, short of a World War III. Any work (moving cars around, heating house, etc) cost energy and emissions.

optioned unarmed said...

i wasn't trying to make a strong statement for or against the existence of human-induced climate change, more expressing that it seems that people frequently pick their beliefs about it based on politics rather than a real understanding of the science.

I like the "precautionary principle" here... If you don't know the effects of what you are doing, then you need to be careful.

I am inclined to believe people-induced climate/earth change is real. But I'm not getting that from science or politics, more from my gut... Kinda like that feeling you get when you know the phone is about to ring right before it does? (except its a slightly more ominous version of that feeling...)

Madame X said...

From what I have read and the scientific data I've seen presented, I think there is strong evidence that man-made forces are influencing climate to a degree far outweighing and accelerating anything that can be seen as part of natural cycles. If you carry the predictions forward, some of the results may be pretty clear, others may be impossible to really predict. Some areas of the world might benefit in some ways, in the short term, but that might be while other areas are thrown into turmoil. My example about my home being underwater might be a bit facetious and exaggerated, but I don't think it's such a bad thing to consider the worst that could happen, just to account for the range of possibilities.
If you were playing Russian roulette, would you say "oh, the risks are exaggerated, most of the chambers are empty. There's no way you'll shoot yourself, all those people who warn that you could blow your brains out are just being hysterical and paranoid!"
There is no certain outcome-- but I originally wrote the post wondering if people might be looking at the risk of global warming as a factor in their decisions, such as whether to invest in companies that are developing alternative energy technologies, whether to visit Venice and the Netherlands now or 30 years from now when they're retired, whether they undertake energy-saving measures to save money or because they think it is better for the planet, etc.