args

The world should focus on climate change than on global economy!

As a brief road map I will 1) Discuss the implications of the resolution, I will then 2) describe the global economic crisis and it's implications, then 3) I will discuss Franlinpoet's understandable concerns that he mentions above. Finally, I will end with an emotionless conclusion. Resolution reads, "The world should focus on climate change than on global economy." It's only safe to assume that this resolution is regarding now and not later and not forever. So the resolution is a call for action either for economic policies or environment policies to become the focus of the legislative groups of various nations. Thus it is not the job of either Franklinpoet or me to state that the economy or environment should always be the main focus. This debate is only focused on determining what governments should be focused primarily on in their upcoming legislative meetings. Should they begin the process of cooperating with scientists and cleaning our good, green Earth? OR Should they continue the process of repairing our damaged infrastructure and economies? And it is this valid question that begins our debate today. The Biding Shackles of the Economy " The global economy is in the worst shape since the dark days of 2009. Six of the 17 countries that use the euro currency are in recession. The U.S. economy is struggling again. And the economic superstars of the developing world — China, India and Brazil — are in no position to come to the rescue. They're slowing, too. " [1] 1) Europe is in a crisis in the status-quo, as illustrated through [2]: A) Spain. In the city Castilla La-Mancha sixty-nine percent of homes built in the last three years are still unsold. Their mega company Martinsa Fadesa declared bankruptcy at the dawn of the recession. Unemployment has risen by 425,000 people. Subsequently sales have fallen 9% and 18% with household goods. The Finance minister called it the worst national recession in a half century. B) Greece. Poor thing, their GDP is now 16% below the pre-crisis peak. 16% is astronomical. Their streets have been covered in riots. The political situation has been malicious and and has become literally violent. And with their wanting economy their carrying the rest of the Euro with them, this has a great effect on the entire continent. C) Portugal received the cold shoulder by Moody's investor when they knocked their rating from Aa2 to a dismal and greatly implicative A1. In 2011 the Prime Minister announced on television that the country had to take immediate steps due to the fact that their nation altogether was facing bankruptcy. D) Iceland. The government collapsed on January 27th, 2009. Enough said. The list goes on and on. The U.K., specifically Ireland, Italy, Germany, France, Denmark, were all hit very hard. The common denominator of all this is millions upon millions of people have lost their jobs. Once successful nations, like Iceland, have corroded within themselves. This is a global epidemic, as the same has happened in Asia. And this, this is happening right now. Not hypothetically tomorrow but visible through your window. Real. Factual. Tangible. 2) United States [3] The sucker that started it. I'm a huge fan of the Economist and a couple months ago they wrote a phenomanel analysis on America's situation. Basically, what it concluded is that America's middle-class is becoming swiftly non-existent. The reason being is they have abandoned their innovative, manufacturing roots. It has been dispersed to other nations, or other nations picked up the torch on such things like innovation (China, Japan.) The 2008 crisis only worsened the situation by making the dwindling of the middle class even more expediate. Without a middle class the economy of the United States is in big trouble. And the way global economy is set, intrinsically, places America as the influencer, hence why America started the Great Recession and it spread like a wild-fire to the rest of the world. If this problem is not fixed with a sense urgency then this Recession has no end in sight. [2] The middles class must be buffered if this recession is to have an end in sight. " In today's interconnected world, we can no longer afford to look only at what goes on within our national borders," IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said earlier this month. "This crisis does not recognize borders. This crisis is knocking at all our doors. If government establish the economy as the main priority then you solve for re-establishing innovation and infrastructure because with a healthy economy--healthy investment is inevitable. Investment pays for the scientist's job who is trying to stop the ambiguously quantified climate change problem. You solve for the economy then you easily solve back for the environment. The Franklinpoet Concerns The first thing I would like to mention is that there is still debates among people much more qualified than us on whether people are actually the cause of climate change. If we aren't then Franklinpoet has no solvency. So there's already uncertainty to his solvency with that matter. The second thing I would like to discuss is that Franklinpoet attempts to answer back for the economic crisis with his Zimbabwe analysis. Well actually he doesn't even solve for it, he just states if global warming happened in Zimbabwe then the economy would get even worse. So there is actually no solvency for the economy in Franklinpoet's paradigm, he just attempts to solve for one thing which probably won't happen hundreds of years from now, if that. But his plan is not comprehensive at all to the world's comprehensive problems. The third issue I would like to discuss, is who exactly is the enforcement in Franklinpoet's advocacy? I hope it's not government, as that process of cleaning the Earth, through gov., would be slowed down with so much red tape, it would be completely futile. So inevitably Franklinpoet's enforcement would be the scientists from the private sector. How's that private sector doing in today's economy? If you want to seriously combat the ambiguously quantified climate-change, then you need a lot of money and power, especially since you'd have to combat nations like China, who wants nothing to do with greenness. Right now, though, there is not alot of excess money to be had. Franklinpoet's advocacy is genuine and good and completely understandable but it's slightly putting the cart before the horse. In other words, you wouldn't try to cure a dog of cancer when it's choking on a bone. To warrant my claim here are the numbers, " Only 14% of those with a PhD in biology or the life sciences can find an academic post within 5 yrs. Pharmcos also have been consolidated and jobs slashed—a 300,000 job “bloodbath,” as described by one expert. Just 38% of new PhD chemists are employed. If you want to fix the environment, then give them more man and financial power, and that starts with curing the financial landscape. The harms of climate change that Franklinpoet lists are slightly entertaining because they are 1) homelessness, 2)Poverty, 3)Unemployment, 4)Private sector downfall. My advocacy solves for these harms, granted governments make the right choices when they do focus on the economy, but these are the exact harms that are occurring right now, in today's world by the global economic crisis. Conclusion So it comes down to this: Franklinpoet: Start working on the environment because if not, it could be devastating to economies, time period unknown. Bruce: Keeping working on economic solutions because our economies are currently going through devastation, and a healthier investment basis solves back for the environment. [1]http://www.google.com... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org... [3]http://hopeycopey.blogspot.com... *Blob, yes, numbers legit, albeit. I observed the same numbers from multiple sources.*