By this argument I assume you think the poor will bear the brunt of any changes caused by climate change?
So what's the argument that the interventions will hurt them more than the problem?
Peterson has anbeasy answer, because he's a loon and doesn't believe in the problem or any of the solutions and can just tack concern for the poor on as rhetoric.
But people who understand the problem and the solutions don't have that luxury.
So what's the argument that the interventions will hurt them more than the problem?
Peterson has anbeasy answer, because he's a loon and doesn't believe in the problem or any of the solutions and can just tack concern for the poor on as rhetoric.
But people who understand the problem and the solutions don't have that luxury.