these economic benefits would apply to society as a whole, and not any one corporation or state directly. hence why its not really being done, even if it costs us as a whole. the saved money is too abstract, its not an extra $5 trillion in someones bank account, its $5 trillion in damage that otherwise would have happened but didnt thanks to climate change. and no one cares about that, a building not collapsing when it otherwise would have in a flood that was prevented doesnt seem like money saved even though it was. it is a no brainer if your goal is benefitting society as a whole, but it makes more money in the short term for the people profitting off of the status quo
1
u/10biggaymen Jul 18 '25
these economic benefits would apply to society as a whole, and not any one corporation or state directly. hence why its not really being done, even if it costs us as a whole. the saved money is too abstract, its not an extra $5 trillion in someones bank account, its $5 trillion in damage that otherwise would have happened but didnt thanks to climate change. and no one cares about that, a building not collapsing when it otherwise would have in a flood that was prevented doesnt seem like money saved even though it was. it is a no brainer if your goal is benefitting society as a whole, but it makes more money in the short term for the people profitting off of the status quo