Why Climate vs Jobs is a false narrative
Share This Article:
In recent years, the dominating narrative on climate change has been the imposing of a choice. We either choose to protect the environment by limiting economic sectors which cause harmful emissions or support economic growth and endanger the planet and our future. Most of the time we get so lost in these extremely polarized standpoints that we forget the issue is much more complex than we, the media, and politicians make it out to be. Perhaps there are other alternatives, which we choose to ignore just for the sake of arguing. In March earlier this year, President Donald Trump signed an order at the Environmental Protection Agency, which, according to officials, prioritized the creation and sustainment of work opportunities, while overlooking the federal government’s enforcement of climate change regulations. This act in a larger sense averts USA’s general approach to the two main factors that impact climate change: rising temperatures and sea levels. The President stated that his decision is the foundation of more profitable production and the creation of more work spaces. However, Trump didn’t stop there. In June, the President announced that the USA will be withdrawing from the Paris climate accord of 2016. The Paris Agreement is agreed upon by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The agreement includes measures, goals, and financing plans to reduce global warming among the countries that have signed the agreement. Various limiting measures are included in the greenhouse gas emissions mitigation plans, including banning of petrol and diesel, less use coal for electricity production, and other. In turn, these limitations are severely harmful and deteriorating for numerous economic sectors involved in generating energy supply. Trump’s argument for backing out of the agreement is that this decision will provide more jobs for American workers. He stated that according to research the cost of staying in the Paris Agreement will be the loss of 2.7 million jobs by 2025. Although it is understandable that Trump wants to satisfy the needs of his political supporters, this decision has been feared and criticized by specialists and influencers alike. Trump's opponents stated that his abrupt decision augurs the imminent death of USA as a powerful international leader. Political analysts have expressed concerns that other world leaders will back out of the agreement in favor of short term economic boost. Bill Clinton and Mark Zuckerberg (below) have severely criticized Trump’s withdraw from the agreement via Twitter and Facebook respectively, stating that this decision is detrimental to both USA’s political future and the world’s upcoming generations.
Walking away from Paris treaty is a mistake. Climate change is real. We owe our children more. Protecting our future also creates more jobs.— Bill Clinton (@billclinton) June 1, 2017
- Article continues below...
- More stories you may like...
- How the upskirting debate has shown MP Christopher Chope should have no place in the House of Commons
- 13 Reasons Why is a real opportunity to help troubled teens
- Little Miss-Ogynist: Why it's about time someone called out the the Mr Men series' sexism
You might also like...
People who read this also read...