Climate change is an increase in the earth's atmospheric temperature since the late nineteenth century. In politics the debate over climate change is centered on whether this increase in temperature is due to greenhouse gas emissions or is the result of a natural pattern in the earth's temperature.
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@52YRS682yrs2Y
Yes, and funding should be increased to replace the fossil fuel industry with nuclear power.
@93XZ3QH2yrs2Y
The people themselves should have more power to prevent businesses from unethical decisions
@4ST2ZSS2yrs2Y
Yes, but not at the cost of crippling our current production sustainability
@WhenDidISayThis2yrs2Y
Yes, but make sure they don't have a big impact on business
@92YHQCV2yrs2Y
Yes, and provide more incentives for alternative energy production, and maybe also tax carbon emissions too if that helps prevent climate change
@92JTPJR2yrs2Y
No, but provide more incentives for alternative energy production. (Embrace hydroelectric power)
@929CSFC2yrs2Y
Abolish HAARP and DARPA
@925YVWM2yrs2Y
On businesses who are actually causing problems
@8ZZN6V42yrs2Y
Yes but only if China, Russia, and India are doing the same. Or at least 2/3 of these countries are doing the same.
@8ZLD3KV2yrs2Y
Yes, but not only for climate change, but for the well-being of our planet and environment.
@8ZGYHH22yrs2Y
no no no no no no no no no no no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@RickStewart2yrs2Y
Minimizing pollution is an appropriate task for government. Regulations are seldom the best way to accomplish this, due to complexity, expense, and unintended consequences. Most economists, most famously a Nobel Prize winner, agree the way to reduce carbon emissions is to tax them. The amount of the tax can be changed quickly, to produce the greatest benefit at the least cost.
@8YYBYBH2yrs2Y
That won't help but if they could try and make more environmentally safe energy sources and get rid of non environmentally safe energy sources.
Deleted2yrs2Y
Yes, but progressively tax greenhouse gas emissions first
@8Y9795V2yrs2Y
Yes and No, we are so long gone into cleaning up the air that heating up the earths atmosphere. is bound to happen. by giving regulations it will help to stop polluting the air but we will have to deal with the air staying polluted to how much it has been up until now we haven't figured out a way to un-pollute the air to reduce heating up the earths atmosphere
@8XTSQNB2yrs2Y
Yes, and provide more incentives for alternative energy production, and tax certain carbon emission sources
@8XT29L42yrs2Y
Yes, but be very price consciencous, as there are far more pressing issues at hand that should be first. Had this country been in the direction it was in 2019, I would say Yes all the way! Economy is the money source for all things including climate change issues, and the administration in 2016-2020 did a fantastic job at it.
However, the biggest climate change thing we could do for the economy and for our earth even more is more |||biodiversity and regenerative farming|||
@8XNT9ZQ2yrs2Y
No, we need decreased government interference in our daily lives. The biggest polluters are currently China, India, Russia and a few other countries. They refused to enter the Paris Climate Agreement and refuse to be held accountable. We should continue to work on persuading them to improve. We should also attend to our own country, but Biden and the Democrats are going about it in a way that is hurting us.
@8XMFL272yrs2Y
No, the climate is solar driven, and not caused by man.
@8WQT4F63yrs3Y
No, climate change is gay.
@8WPN6733yrs3Y
We cant prevent it, it is too far along in the process, we can only slow it at this point
@89CDM9C3yrs3Y
I depends on the regulation.
@8WK5SV93yrs3Y
No, provide more incentives for alternative energy production instead and global warming is a natural occurrence in some areas.
@8WCYPDT3yrs3Y
No, but I think that all companies should perform a buy back program. where they buy back used products like cans or bags so they can be re used
@8W72ZMQ3yrs3Y
@6LV5ZML3yrs3Y
Yes, and provide more incentives for alternative energy production at a state level; including different tiers of regulations per type and size of entity and their footprint. A sole proprietor shouldn't have to follow the same regulations as a massive corporation, and other things like region, risk, etc. should be taken into account. This can't be a one-size fits all solution.
@8VX6HF43yrs3Y
No, create carbon licenses.
@8VC7WDN3yrs3Y
Any works that aim to prevent climate change should be a matter the private sector can solve better than the government can.
@8VC7WDN3yrs3Y
Preventing climate change should be a matter the private sector can solve better than the government can.
@8NZ6JPS3yrs3Y
Yes, a nationalize energy to be more green
@8V3VYRH3yrs3Y
Animals are dying from climate change and i think they should do something about it or the world will be terrible.
@8V2D87P3yrs3Y
Yes, however since the government can control the climate this should not be a big issue.
@8TVYZQL3yrs3Y
Yes, but mostly the government should invest in scientific research to solve the problem rather than prevent it since the problem cannot be prevented anymore.
@lucasnat0r3yrs3Y
No America is already preventing climate change and anything added would be dwarfed by the problems caused by foreign countries.
@7RGBCQB3yrs3Y
Yes, only if it is necessary.
@8TPZHT73yrs3Y
Yes, nationalize all energy companies and transition them to green energy
Deleted3yrs3Y
No, but climate change needs to be combatted.
@8SF6R493yrs3Y
I think the government should try to prevent global warming but they should not add more business regulations for climate change. There should be little regulations on businesses. but I think global warming is a very important issue.
@8SBNN723yrs3Y
Well you can't really stop all the pollution around the world currently anyways
