So please stop complaining, put a hat, pull your bootstrap and go back to the construction site. And try not to fall in the ground because you might get a third degree burn on the asphalt and we can’t afford a replacement since nobody want to work anymore.
The Nordhaus estimates were always known for having limited utility for large changes in temperatures.
They assumed that damage to a sector wouldn’t matter much if it was currently a small part of the economy. For example, if agriculture was 2% of the US economy, and agricultural output went to zero, the result would be 2% damage to GDP. The real world doesn’t work that way though: people who are starving to death don’t work, so GDP would go to zero in that case.
What ? Climate change is impacting negatively the economy ?
No it’s not possible. Remember, 3°C of warming would only reduce the global GDP by 2.1%. (According to Nobel prize winner William Nordhaus)
So please stop complaining, put a hat, pull your bootstrap and go back to the construction site. And try not to fall in the ground because you might get a third degree burn on the asphalt and we can’t afford a replacement since nobody want to work anymore.
/s
Imagine how much money shipping companies will make/save when they can send cargo haulers where the ice caps used to be!
The Nordhaus estimates were always known for having limited utility for large changes in temperatures.
They assumed that damage to a sector wouldn’t matter much if it was currently a small part of the economy. For example, if agriculture was 2% of the US economy, and agricultural output went to zero, the result would be 2% damage to GDP. The real world doesn’t work that way though: people who are starving to death don’t work, so GDP would go to zero in that case.