Say economists..........?!?!

I say bullshit...............!!!

Why would we lose that money if there was no action on our part about climate change.

Why would the construction industry be at risk.

No details just scare tactics, typical climate change pushers like drugs.

Maybe JV can explain as I was never a good economist.

And it would be the first section of books I would burn from a library to keep warm, no great loss imo.

So why are we at risk.........anyone......?

https://i.ibb.co/wBshkCM/oztol3tril-JPG.jpg


Australia will lose more than $3 trillion and 880,000 jobs over 50 years if climate change is not addressed, Deloitte says


Quote:

The Australian economy will lose more than $3 trillion over the next 50 years if climate change is not addressed, according to a new report from Deloitte Access Economics. The report found the economy could shrink by 6 per cent over the next 50 years and 880,000 jobs could be lost. Report author Pradeep Philip, who was a policy director for former prime minister Kevin Rudd, said there was also a lot to be gained if warming was kept below 1.5 degrees and Australia achieved net zero carbon emissions by 2050. "If we do act over the next few years then in just 50 years there is a benefit to the economy of $680 billion," he said. "We'll have an economy 2.6 per cent bigger, generating 250,000 jobs, so this tells us if you are pro-growth and pro-jobs then we need to act on climate change now.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-02/australian-economy-lose-$3-trillion-climate-change-inaction/12837244

Easy example: because of rising sea water temperatures half the corals in the GBR are already dead. Dead reef = dead reef tourism industry.

Another easy example: bludgers like Australia could be hit by “green tariffs.”

Another easy example: what industry we have will get further and further behind industry in carbon reducing countries.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2020 at 2:56pm:

Easy example: because of rising sea water temperatures half the corals in the GBR are already dead. Dead reef = dead reef tourism industry.

You mean those reefs that miraculously came back to life? ;D ;D ;D ;D

peter Ridd got sacked because he wasn't "collegial"; opening the door on the bad science from JCU.

Corals have been around for for millions of years. have survived glaciation, warm periods but somehow they are now susceptible? ;)


Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2020 at 2:56pm:

Another easy example: bludgers like Australia could be hit by “green tariffs.”

From places like Japan, China etc that are building ever more coal fired plant?



Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2020 at 2:56pm:

Another easy example: what industry we have will get further and further behind industry in carbon reducing countries.

You mean like those industries that need stable power supplies? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2020 at 2:56pm:

Easy example: because of rising sea water temperatures half the corals in the GBR are already dead. Dead reef = dead reef tourism industry. Another easy example: bludgers like Australia could be hit by “green tariffs.” Another easy example: what industry we have will get further and further behind industry in carbon reducing countries.

As Lee pointed out JV not much to go on.

Now care to explain why economists are using scare tactics for global warming....?

And why so many economists are the mouth piece and front men / women for global warming.

Quote:

Report author Pradeep Philip, who was a policy director for former prime minister Kevin Rudd, said there was also a lot to be gained if warming was kept below 1.5 degrees and Australia achieved net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Hasn't Pradeep heard that the last 40 years of empirical data (observations in nature) show that we will only increase by 1°C end of 2100 century.

Why would an economist only listen to one side of the argument, he stand to lose a lot of money if he backs the wrong horse.

OR

Does he know something we don't.

Like I said previously this is a scare tactic for those that have no clue as to the world they live in.

These people will believe this propaganda verbatim.

Australia could re-employ Kevin Rudd and have him give away $3 trillion to the third world countries.