You can’t negotiate an end to storms
A rather silly post by Danyl:
One thing we should have learned from the TPP is that we’re entering a period of diminishing returns from free trade deals. But there’s also an opportunity cost here. While all of our diplomats are trying to negotiate lower dairy tariffs to grow our economy they’re not doing anything about climate change, which is a major economic challenge that requires a diplomatic solution.
Droughts and extreme weather events are expensive things. The 2008 drought cost the country about $2.8 billion in one year (the TPPA is supposed to bring in $2 billion over ten years). To avoid entering a period of catastrophic droughts and storms we have to agree on a global reduction of carbon emissions. So that’s something need to be negotiated between states. Y’know – diplomatically. It is so, so stupid that we have all of these diplomats running around trying to eke out trivial gains from trade agreements while ignoring this massive looming crisis that is going to devastate our economy.
Wow this is pretty weak stuff. Where do I start:
- Incredibly stupid to suggest that MFAT can’t both negotiate trade deals and negotiate on climate change. It is not an either or.
- Comparing the cost of a drought to the gains from a trade deal is also stupid. MFAT can’t negotiate a drought away
- Yes increased greenhouse gases will probably lead to more extreme weather events, but even if an agreement was made this year to reduce emissions, it would take decades to make an impact