At what price?

Hallelujah brothers and sisters - it finally seems that momentum is gathering for the environment to be a critical election issue. What I find ironic and interesting is those still arguing against the immediate action required, are still focused how much it will cost us as a society to rectify the issues (of course they then remember to deny that any such issues really exist - "it's all just a natural cycle". Sure, just ask farmers near Newcastle who've gone straight from drought to flood).

So if we accept for a moment this argument - that action will represent a significant cost to our booming economy and standards of living - what price are we prepared to pay to ensure a safe, clean and healthy environment for future generations? If we to accept the reports of Stern or the IPCC and do the requisite economic modelling on the investment price of new technologies, replacing or building infrastructure, etc - and then translate this into a per capita taxation price - what would we be prepared to pay?

$5 a week? Maybe $10? At what price point would you say - "no, this is costing me too much and impacting my standard of living?"

My fear is that the issue of our environment may follow the all-too-well-trodden path of aid to third world countries - being the biggest issue of a particular moment but we fail to ever actually resolve it. Governments make largely token efforts e.g. we'll give you aid with a massive interest rate or tie it to trade barriers in our favour, and the general public will come together to record a LiveAid CD, then for the large part forget about the issue.

I hope I'm just being overly cynical.