Delayed compensation for actions taken today.
Why save any money, why not spend it all today and enjoy life? Why should I defer my pleasure today for some potential issues in the future? These are all typical arguments against disaster mitigation in all its forms.
While emergency managers don't normally engage on climate economics, I thought this article was illuminating, Mnuchin said Thunberg needed to study economics before offering climate proposals. So we talked to an economist.
My adult children are not planning on getting any social security benefits by the time they retire. My eldest son will be retirement age around 2035 when social security is currently projected to be "upside-down" with not having enough cash to meet all it's obligations of payments to retirees. Thus, their savings program is accounting for the assumption of no government funding.
The challenge with the climate argument is that people and organizations don't want to "take a hit" now that impacts their bottom line. Government is the absolute worst with managing money and the future. We are currently on a "spending high" running-up what equates to personal credit debit to live the high-life. The economy is stoked with extra cash from tax cuts and additional federal borrowing.
All is well--until it isn't...