Here’s a novel idea. Take the billions of dollars that’s going toward what supposedly is a settled science issue — climate change — and use it to create a pool for pre-existing conditions.
It is our duty to help those less fortunate and for the government to provide a safety net. So let’s form that safety net, dealing with a known problem today, not a ghost that may or may not be there tomorrow — especially since in the age of fossil fuels human progress has skyrocketed. Do you think medicine would be where it is now without the fossil fuel era?
The rest of the nation would be in the free market for insurance, and combined with tort reform and portability, we may be able to bring the price down.
What has been the cost of fighting climate change? Check out this article in Forbes. All that money for what? A few molecules of CO2 when the established temperature-CO2 record shows no linkage?
We can’t run from the problems of today, nor can you run from the record of the past. People are much more valuable than a few molecules of CO2.
I doubt the American people approve of billions of dollars being spent on researching whether or not the earth is flat (no offense to Kyrie Irving) or other forms of “settled science.” So for the sake of those suffering from pre-existing conditions, why don’t we take the grant money for climate change research and give it to those who really need it? If it’s “settled science,” then give up the money. You can’t have it both ways! What about investing in our inner cities, another need now? Do climate change researchers need the money more than our sick, poor and needy? I think not. I know not.
[Originally Published at the Patriot Post.]
Formerly the Chief Long Range Forecaster at Accuweather, Joe Bastardi is an institution in the science of weather prediction. Many companies across a multitude of industries, from energy to retail, have profited from his forecasts.
