The Climate Crisis Is a Cost-of-Living Crisis — and Voters Are Concerned About Both
Data for Progress and Climate and Community Institute's monthly snapshot of the widespread demand and pathways forward for climate action.
Intensifying political chaos and insufficient planning to combat climate and economic crises pose existential challenges. In this newsletter, we offer a monthly snapshot of the widespread demand for climate action and pathways forward.
The Climate Crisis Is a Cost-of-Living Crisis — and Voters Are Concerned About Both
Last month, CBS News reported that 60% of people in the U.S. cannot afford their basic costs of living, with the majority of Americans living paycheck to paycheck. Credit card debts have reached a total of $1.1 trillion, and the average minimum wage worker would need to work four full-time jobs to afford their rent. Volatile oil prices are driving inflation, food and fuel prices are rising and will only worsen as our planet warms, hotter summers are increasing utility bills, insurers are price gouging on premiums after major disasters, and health care costs are surging due to pollution compounded by climate change. People cannot keep up with the rising costs of goods and services, and it’s only getting worse because of climate change.
A recent poll by Data for Progress shows that a majority (58%) of likely voters think climate change will impact their personal finances either somewhat or greatly. Nearly three-quarters of Democrats (73%) say they will be either greatly or somewhat impacted, while 41% of Republicans believe the same.
Cost of living is a bipartisan, multiracial issue — and the effects of the climate crisis are sure to make basic needs more expensive, scarce, and out of reach for working people. Right now, it’s imperative that kitchen-table concerns are linked to climate breakdown.
Climate and Community Institute recently released a memo arguing that effective solutions must bridge both the climate and cost-of-living crises simultaneously. In “Seize the Future,” they write that bringing down costs will both bring down emissions and deliver material relief to millions of working people. CCI recommends three overarching pathways to take on cost of living in a way that avoids further climate breakdown:
Slash housing costs and deliver healthy, green, affordable homes for all
Lower the cost of living by investing in essential services such as utilities and transportation
Invest in the social safety net to reduce care costs and raise standards of living.
Making this large-scale transformation a reality will require what CCI co-directors call “green economic populism”: folding climate policies into an agenda that tackles the cost-of-living crisis and centers the working class. CCI’s research shows that concrete, universal policies and programs — from a national Tenant Bill of Rights and a Green Social Housing Development Authority, to a Green New Deal for Public Schools and federal funding for emissions-free mass transit — can rapidly decarbonize the economy and improve the lives of people who need this the most, including organized and unorganized workers, tenants, debtors, and ratepayers.
We don’t need to choose between addressing the climate crisis and ensuring all Americans can lead dignified, healthy lives. CCI’s “Seize the Future” offers a path forward that meets Americans where they’re feeling the climate crisis— in the rising, and increasingly untenable, cost of living.
America is run for corporate profit. The government is uninterested in people other than as a benefit for the corporations, and that means you must be an investor, or a customer, or a worker. Anyone who does not fulfil one of those three roles is irrelevant for the corporations and irrelevant for the American government.
Even worse, many of them are a burden on the government because they have a net cost, and are therefore a burden on the corporations too because they require taxes to support them.
In that context, climate regulation is a burden on corporations that make more profit by dumping their waste and pollution and not clearing it up, and exploiting resources without regulations or remedial work. Trump's government supports that view.
Lastly, the popular vote is now meaningless. Trump no longer cares what people think, or say, or protest about, or vote, because the system will be comprehensively rigged from here forward. So whilst I applaud your dreams and optimism, out here in the real world, your projects have zero to negligible chances of success in the USA.
If you want to do such things, then move to a country that already embraces many of your proposals, such as in Europe.
Heavily researched does not guarantee correct. Even one erroneous assumption in common renders pages of references, papers and citations useless. CAGW’s GHE contains three such assumptions.
GHE claims without it Earth becomes 33 C cooler, a 255 K, -18 C, ball of ice.
Wrong.
Naked Earth would be much like the Moon, barren, 400 K lit side, 100 K dark.
TFK_bams09 heat balance graphic uses the same 63 twice violating GAAP and calculating out of thin air a 396 BB/333 “back”/63 net GHE radiative forcing loop violating LoT 1 & 2.
Wrong.
Likewise, the ubiquitous plethora of clones.
GHE requires Earth to radiate “extra” energy as a BB.
Wrong.
A BB requires all energy leaving the system to do so by radiation. Per TFK_bams09 60% leaves by kinetic modes, i.e. conduction, convection, advection and latent rendering BB impossible.
GHE is bogus and CAGW a scam so alarmists must resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.