max-b--blog

[max-b--blog]

Post 1

What’s up blog.  Today we’re going to talk about the sentiments surround clean energy.  There are two main arguments and point of views that are present in this discussion; sadly, the debate is very strongly politicized.  It is unfortunate, because it undermines what is really important (the looming effects of climate change) and shifts the focus on to something that is sadly the main motive behind all politics: money.  It is obvious that making a significant change to the way that we go about our day to day lives will require extensive capital investments from the people of America in order to get it done.  No one likes to pay more money; however, conservatives especially are resistant to just about any form of taxation.  I fall under the side that lines up with the liberal perspective.  Even though I don’t wish to give my money away, I can’t just deny the looming fact that we must make a change in order to protect the environment.  That’s the part that truly doesn’t make sense to me: the fact that people not only do not vote to make legislation in favor of clean energy, but they outright deny the existence of climate change as a whole.  It is one thing to fall in line with political views, but it’s almost unforeseen to see just about half of the population deny scientific evidence that is presented to them.  I like to believe that the United States is a place of rational people, and not being able to accept scientific facts is quite alarming. What’s more, in addition to than half of the population not backing this debate, the major interest groups that protest and do everything in their power to stop the movement towards clean energy (by shorting stocks and lobbying/bribing politicians) are all backed by some of the biggest and richest corporations in America.  This shows that the primary aspect that drives the opposing force is purely fiscal.  People who can afford to see the planet deteriorate do not feel the need to follow any efforts that stop the damage.  This isn’t too surprising thought; say, hypothetically, all predictions are correct, and L.A. is actually submerged in a foot of water in 5 years, those people that are lobbying against making any positive change still wouldn’t be affected.  They would be rich and resourceful enough to be okay with just about any sort of outcome that threatens society.  It’d be the people that can’t afford to fend against mother nature that would get hit the worst, because there is nothing, they could really do about it. To reiterate my most passionate point mentioned: to me, it is not so much the fact that people vote against clean energy laws, it’s more the fact that people are ignorant enough to go on about their life simply denying the scary and looming truth about climate change. I think the saddest of all truths is that it will take a bunch more wild fires and unruly storms to directly smack people in the face in order for them to wake up.