limate change is such a controversial topic in the U.S., says Thomas Friedman in The New York Times, that many politicians don't "dare" discuss it in public. And the GOP's "totally bogus 'discrediting' of climate science has had serious implications." For starters, it helped "scuttle" an energy-climate bill that would have helped encourage the development of U.S.-made clean technologies. Now our companies are "at a distinct disadvantage in the next great global industry." What a contrast between the supposedly business-friendly U.S. and Communist China. There, most leaders are scientists and engineers who wouldn't dream of questioning scientific data. Instead, they look for ways to turn it to their advantage by making a green push to capitalize on the business of tomorrow. Here, an excerpt:
Because runaway pollution in China means wasted lives, air, water, ecosystems and money — and wasted money means fewer jobs and more political instability — China's leaders would never go a year (like we will) without energy legislation mandating new ways to do more with less. It's a three-for-one shot for them. By becoming more energy efficient per unit of G.D.P., China saves money, takes the lead in the next great global industry and earns credit with the world for mitigating climate change.
So while America’s Republicans turned "climate change" into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China's Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S.
Read the full article at The New York Times.
- How does chocolate milk stack up as a sports drink?
- Diagnosing the Home Alone burglars' injuries: A professional weighs in
- This is the twistiest tongue twister ever, says science
- How did Love Actually become so controversial? A theory
- Cul-de-sacs are killing America
- Was the sign-language interpreter at the Mandela memorial faking it?
- Which professions have the most psychopaths?
- The 10 worst-reviewed movies of 2013
- 72 years together: The couple who died holding hands
- The last racial taboo
Subscribe to the Week