Hayward, Tim. "Can Money Transfers Serve to Offset Ecological Harms". In Global Justice and Finance, by Tim Hayward, 96-113. Awaiting Publication.

Hayward, Tim. "Can Money Transfers Serve to Offset Ecological Harms". In Global Justice and Finance, by Tim Hayward, 96-113. Awaiting Publication.

• The simple solution to poverty, growing the economy for everyone, is simply not possible under current ecological constraints since doing that would not be environmentally sustainable (96).
• The author argues that, since continued environmental degredation will undoubtedly have affects on the global economy and finance market which will affect the value of fiat currencies, putting aside money in a development fund to offset the ecological harm to the poor is a terrible idea, since that money may not keep its value (97, 104, 109). This is technically true, but an investment fund in something like government bonds would solve this problem pretty easily by switch assets out of fiat currency. 
• Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of England, warned about the financial instability that climate change could bring. Climate change will radically change and overwhelm the insurance market due to increased number of severe natural disasters (98-99), and fears over the future prices of fossil fuel due to regulation could introduce uncertainty into a huge and critical market (99-100). If polluting corporations are held financial responsible for these damages, a measure not currently implemented but which has been suggested, this could bankrupt several industries as well as liquidate huge quantities of investments (99).
• The author further contends that the effects of climate change are 'radically uncertain', meaning that we don't know what could happen: it could be crazy and destroy the entire financial system STAY WOKE! (100-101, 106).
• The proposed solution of Mr. Carney and other 'environmental liberals' to the unknown threats of climate change is to raising and saving money to account for future potential losses due to climate change. This perspective assumes that money will be able to offset environmental damage (101-102).
• This logic, often adopted by international organizations and governments for use in selling their proposals to conservative or market liberal voters, makes the claim that investing in measures to mitigate climate change is a sound investment since it provides some returns will prevent the losses associated with climate change (103).
• One of the major issues with this perspective is that it requires placing monetary values on abstract concepts like soil, water, and air quality which have unknown and possibly incalculable economic value. This view is thus epistemologically flawed (104).
• The other essential problem with environmental liberalism is that assumption that the damages of climate change can be solved with money. Climate change will result in forced displacement of millions as well as profound changes in lifestyle. The author abjects to these effects being quantified in economic terms (105-106).
• The author casts doubt on the availability of necessary goods in the future. Having money stored for the negative effect of climate change is worthless if supplies of food or coal or other essential goods are insufficient. This means that climate change needs to be stopped and saving money cannot be the only solution (111).