Hacker News Reader

Comment by bwb | Hacker News Reader

we should spend the money to help all humans, its already going to be bad. We need to move faster and prob manhattan project carbon removal tech

View on HN

What percentage of Americans’ income should go to these projects? And should we take care of our own citizens first?

> should we take care of our own (American) citizens first?

We should take care of the planet. We all live on it and catastrophic heat waves and extreme weather are not polite and do not respect the thick black lines we've drawn on maps.

For avoidance of doubt, I am absolutely saying that if those of us who are citizens or residents of the United States, European Union (with or without the United Kingdom), Australia, Canada, Japan, and anywhere else anyone might think of needs to take a hit to our net incomes and economic circumstances in order to keep the planet habitable, I am all for it.

I asked for a percentage.

I'm only seeing policies which seem designed to change the behaviour of the less well-off: a daily charge for driving in certain areas that is priced the same whether you are an average Joe in a compact car or millionaire in a super-car is not going to influence the latter.

Such a project will take care of our citizens. Maybe not "first" because technically it takes care of ALL people first, and therefore no one is "second." The US gov would be in a unique position to do it owing of course to the pool of talent and resources it can draw from. I don't have a clue where you live, but I live in the Mountain West and the water wars are constant issue on peoples minds. Not to mention, changing climate will induce immigration. Where do you think people will immigrate if they can? If your argument is about "American's first" with falling birthrates and neoliberal supremacy and whatnot, you're going to have a whole lot of new neighbors if their climate gets worse, because America first.

That’s a long answer that doesn’t address my question.

Addresses the second question. It's impossible to answer your first. And if you're looking for short answers to those sorts of questions, well then you should already know ;)

Why should I already know? I’m not the one volunteering even more of Americans’ hard-won tax dollars to save people in other countries when we have many, many people hurting in our own country. Those in favor of taking more of my money are responsible for presenting a compelling reason to do so.

You are naive if you don't think your tax dollars right now are going to a million things in a million different ways that don't benefit you, and that it's not intentional. In the end such decisions aren't made by convincing people like you or me they work in our favor or the American people's favor. I won't try to convince you. You didn't understand what I meant by "you already know" and you didn't respond to anything I said, just kept parroting your line of reasoning.

You made a bunch of assertions that amount to taking even more money from American taxpayers. It’s your responsibility to present the deliverables and their cost.

We should take care of earthlings first. Then we can help the creatures from Venus. I really hate them though because their flag is red.

So don't help these people directly but fund large projects instead?

Why does it need to be one thing?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com