A half degree cooler or $45 trillion poorer? You make the call. And remember, these are the cost numbers from climate alarmists, so they are very likely way too low.
The press is so used to the politically correct language of victimization, that they don’t even think about it before applying it. As a result, global warming alarmists get a pass on claiming to be helping the poor by fighting global warming.
But this is absurd. The poor don’t care about polar bears or bad snow at the ski resort or hurricanes hitting their weekend beach house. They care about agriculture, which has always been improved by warmer weather and longer growing seasons, and development, which relies on the profligate expenditure of every hydrocarbon they can get their hands on. Can anyone really argue that a half degree warmer world is harder on the poor than a $45 trillion dollar price increase in energy costs?