The young people also need their healthcare funded right now, along with their education, job stimulus, etc. kinda a privileged attitude, if they just assume mommy and daddy can pay their bills when the economy implodes. it's a difficult and complex balance, so one can only carefully navigate somewhere down the middle.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Take the money out of the >20 billion in subsidies for oil an gas, take it by taxing the ultra-rich who are fucking this country over. If the only "reasonable" reaction to pressure by the US is to double down on oil and fuck over the next guy then we already are a US state.

[–] TimothyOilypants@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Not directly related, but can we also seize Kevin O'Leary's assets and fire him out of a cannon into the sun?

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago

As long as it is televised on CBC.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago

I agree we need to tax the rich more. But where do think that money sits? It's not in a checking account. It's in shares of companies and other investments. If the rich are forced to pay billions in tax, they have to pull money out of those things and that causes real operational reductions - ie layoffs and less productivity- and that means less product available to consumers - and so prices rise. It's a complex interplay of issues and not really as simple as just 'tax the rich'. Not saying we shouldn't, but we have to do it carefully. Oil and gas subsidies are pretty short sighted, it seems, but why do you think it's done? It's to get international investment and productivity higher so people have jobs, we can buy things that we need from other countries and have produced resources for ourselves.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Every time the same argument. "Let's keep our unsustainable society without any drastic change until the collapse becomes inevitable and it's too late to prepare for it" is such a pragmatic approach.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The problem is that we simply can't throw our economy away. It would lead to disaster even quicker.

[–] khaleer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

You know what you can do right now? ~~Tax the rich!~~ prepare ladder to make a fall even more hard!

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

Our economy is not in free fall right now. Everything we talk about here is not for short term. So the question is what do we want our economy to be in the coming years. Answer: great after 10 years, and then until 20 years from now, as we rip the money from oil and gas. But at the same time, declining until…

Free fall as the cost of climate disaster will not only nullify but then dig into the budgets until we're overwhelmed. Floods, fires, crop failures. Not only is the plan to be totally unprepared, but renouncing climate targets mean we'll actively contributing to make the situation worse. And all of this is written already. The only way to prevent it would be to abruptly stop all fossil consumption tomorrow morning, and yes, on that we agree: it would be a disaster. We're not talking hypothetical situations. We're deciding today how bad it's going to be, from very bad to absolute disaster. Very bad is we make a very very hard transition right fucking now.
But we decided it's more pragmatic to bet on future absolute disaster…

But worse even for us: emergent countries are transitioning faster than expected. So it's possible than 10 years from now, when we built pipelines, the world's demands will be lower than planned, and we will be the idiots who wasted billions in the fossil industry and are now helpless in front of climate change driven disasters while the rest of the world, regardless how prepared they will be, will struggle just the same, because there is a limit to how much you can be prepared: you can prepare for very bad. You can't be prepared for absolute disaster.

[–] NebulaNymph@programming.dev 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Who gives a fuck about the economy imploding at the expense of the extinction of our species?
The 'economy' is made up nonsense to enrich the most morally bankrupt involved while shitting on everyone else.
The death of our planet's ecosystem is a real possible future we are facing; let the economy burn.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago

Well if we're so bad, maybe it's good that we go extinct?
The economy just is a part of society and is the way we organize resources. The way our capitalist society works, money naturally keeps moving upwards and screwing the poor - it needs strong regulation to work in a way that is beneficial for most people. Canada is better than the U.S. there. But there are realities that require society (and the economy) to continue to operate in such a way that allows the country to provide for its citizens. If the economy burns and society collapses, which you seem to want, then there will not be resources available to support the people. And any semblance of regulation that keeps lawful order and social safety nets will fail. And at that point likely some group will take over and then do whatever they want - without any regulation. So probably worse for the ecosystem.