Skip to main content

The Kindest Cut of All


December 10, 2013 – Picking up where we left off last week, businesses at the leading edge of climate change understanding have discovered that the cost of climate change inaction is greater than the cost of grappling with climate change.  No surprise to climatologists, this is a concept badly in need of promulgation.  The response in Washington is and will always be, but where do we find the money?  The answer is simple.  No one wants to be the first (or second, or third) to say it out loud, but it has to be said.  The money will, and must, be taken out of the defense budget.  Smaller percentages will come from entitlements’ budgets.  These are all tough pills to swallow, but the alternative is unimaginably worse.

The defense budget currently stands at $530 billion, not including any ongoing wars.  That number needs to be cut dramatically, and it needs to be cut right away.  Halving the defense budget within five years would afford the United States $265 billion per year with which to mitigate climate change, and ameliorate its ever-increasing consequences.  Helping poorer, more vulnerable nations would also be a possibility.  Decreasing the defense budget by $200 billion dollars, with the remainder coming from entitlements, could accomplish the same thing. 

Speaking as an older American with only a few years left in my working life, I guarantee you I understand how these changes could impact those of us looking forward to retirement.  I’ve worked for 27 of the last 38 years, and paid into social security for 21 of them.  Doug and I hope to move to the Pacific Northwest, but only if we feel comfortable with regard to our future income.  A decrease in social security payments could very well scuttle those plans, but what choice have we got?  The correct answer is no choice.

There will be those who will argue that decreasing our defense budget is impossible; the United States has acted since World War II as the world’s policeman.  This is a fact that will not brook argument.  The problem with this argument is that it only takes into account the past.  It gives not even a nod to the catastrophic changes we face in the not-distant future.  Then there are those who will exclaim yes, exactly!  How much more will our military might be essential to a functioning world?

To which one can only respond that beyond a certain point, the breakdown of civilization precludes functionality.  We must and can address environmental issues with the greatest priority.  To simply accept that we will be overwhelmed by events, and that the one decisive answer comes out of the end of a gun, is to relegate ourselves to the dustheap.  To accept eventual irrelevance by means of inaction fails to recognize our responsibility to make G-d manifest in the world.  Our gorgeous planet was given to us as a gift, bequeathed to us by a loving Creator.  Accepting responsibility may not be much fun, but it makes a worthwhile future a possibility.



With thanks to thewashingtonpost.com .

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Great March for Climate Action

December 23, 2013 – Have you heard about The Great March for Climate Action?   I just learned about it today.   Organizers have determined it will take them 246 days to march from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C.   They are looking for 1,000 people – 20 from each state – to participate.   The march is stopping in many, many locations along the way so that locals can participate for as little as a day, or as long as they like. The march is Ed Fallon’s brainchild.   Ed, along with most of his staff members, is from Iowa, where he served as a state legislator for fourteen years.   He currently hosts a radio program called Fallon Forum.   Fallon began his career as a social activist coordinating the Iowa section of the Great Peace March in 1986.  Ed bases his approach on Great Marches of the past.  Women suffragists marched on Washington on March 3, 1913; Gandhi led the Salt March in India on March 12, 1930; Dr. King led the voting rights march from Selma to Montgomery

Greenland: A State of Rapid Collapse

 September 1, 2020 The good news, such as it is, goes like this: the suspense is over. No need to guess about whether sea level rise will be life-altering by the end of this century or not. It will, at least for the 40 percent of humankind which lives on or near a coastline. That's because all the ice on Greenland is going to melt, according to researchers at Ohio State University (yes, yes, I know - it's THE Ohio State University. Get over yourselves.) Their research appeared in the journal Nature Communications Earth and Environment in August. Total meltdown will take 10,000 years, but enough will have melted by 2100 to cause sea level rise of approximately three feet. That will cover a lot of coastal property, a loss made worse by storms and hurricanes. How have researchers reached this conclusion? By studying almost 40 years of satellite data. Glaciers on Greenland have shrunk so much since the year 2000 that even if global warming came to a complete stop, they would contin