Ahead of the Paris Conference in 2015, G20 leaders called climate change "one of the greatest challenges of our time."
Right now, however, it's being trumped by a different issue: income inequality.
Populism policies and rhetoric, easily dismissed for decades, are massively gaining steam, as discussed in this column last week regarding Europe, through Sanders and Trump in the U.S. and, most relevant to us, in the current Conservative leadership race.
The anger and frustration these movements are tapping into is clearly that of growing income inequality which has risen for decades in most developed countries. On the right, the knee-jerk reaction to this growing inequality has been to blame refugees and immigration (for taking jobs) while on the left the calls have been for a higher minimum wage. Meanwhile, both sides are attributing at least some blame on free trade.
In rural areas, such as ours, there are problems of little or no economic growth, while in places where growth is taking place, such as in the Lower Mainland, costs for housing and other necessities are skyrocketing.
Problems with some of the proposed solutions:
1) Even if refugees and immigration are contributing factors to growing income inequality or economic instability (most studies say they aren't), restricting either of these, in terms of volume, is not the solution (security concerns are obviously a separate issue). This is especially clear in a place such as 100 Mile House, where we have the oldest population in Northern B.C., but we didn't get the first baby until mid-February. If a community (and by extension country) such as ours is going to stay economically viable and vibrant, we're going to need an influx of people.
2) Raising minimum wage isn't, by itself, a good solution either. In 2016, amidst the fight for a $15 minimum wage, MacDonalds started replacing cashiers with self-service kiosks. Ultimately, raising the minimum wage will only speed up the drive for automation, increase inflation and potentially put some small businesses out of business.
3) Anti-trade policies likely have the most merit, as without a doubt some jobs have gone abroad as well as giving governments fewer options in regards to stimulating domestic economies (i.e. by financially supporting domestic companies). However, while manufacturing has started coming back, most of the jobs have been taken over by machines.
The real problem is that there does not appear to be an easy solution. The most commonly proposed solution, a tax on the wealthiest, whether based on capital, income or consumption, may simply result in the hiring of better accountants to dodge those taxes or moving capital to lower tax countries.
What we need is a serious discussion and study of potential solutions and a strategy to stimulate growth, while decreasing income inequality. What we don't need is more scapegoat issues offered by politicians with no or questionable expertise on economic policies.