Nelson Otto
Jefferson City
Dear Editor:
Recently, an LTE spoke of (and I'm paraphrasing) putting a child in a car seat, even on short trips and in a life vest if they go on the water, no matter how unlikely an accident is to occur is like how we should address climate change. Even if we don't think it will occur, we should prepare for it to protect the children. Putting a child in car seats and life vests are smart things to do, but it is a terrible analogy when it comes to things like a carbon tax/dividend.
A better way to describe it would be that government taxed the auto and boat industries to the point of bankruptcy to protect our children from auto accidents and drowning. Yes, once the industries went out of business because no one could afford the tax anymore your children would be safe, well at least from these two dangerous activities. However, you couldn't go to work, grocery or any kind of shopping, school, visit relatives and family, who were beyond walking distance, and a million other things one does with an automobile. Now the boat you could do without; who really needs to be out on the water?
If one wants solutions to a perceived danger, then at least use the most effective way to protect the ones you love without the mindless destruction. The car seat and life vests were the best way to ensure protection. That is how we need to rethink climate. Whether you believe in the great heating or not, the reality is that weather fluctuates madly and has since the beginning.
If you want to protect future generations, then we have to stop thinking nature is a wonderful nurturing mother and realize how brutal and uncaring it is. Once we realize that, then we need to plan to mitigate, as much as we can, the destructive forces of nature. Taxing businesses into oblivion in the vain hopes of altering nature or getting a little extra spending money is just plain insane and won't help anyone.