As the planet warms, it’s the poor around the world who will suffer the most

That’s the warning coming from a new World Bank report that projects global temperatures increasing 4-degrees Celsius by the end of the century. The temperature increase will be felt the most along the equator in the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and parts of the United States. This temperature increase will lead to scarcity in water and food resources and disruptions in biodiversity – which could force mass migrations of people out of affected areas.

Rising temperatures will also lead to rising sea levels which threaten cities located in India, Mexico, and Vietnam – as well as several African nations. The World Bank also warns that several small islands around the planet will likely be unable to sustain their populations by 2100. This is the threat that the entire planet faces if global climate change is left unchecked. Luckily – people are getting active.

On Sunday – thousands of people showed up outside the White House to protest against the Keystone XL pipeline, which has been described by climate scientists as a “ticking time bomb” for the planet. We need more people in the streets to force government to listen to the future generations that will inherit this planet rather than the oil barons that are destroying it.

Comments

Global's picture
Global 9 years 32 weeks ago
#1

Right on que, watch and listen for all the left wing media to jump on Cap and Trade. The talking points are out and the propaganda machine is ready to roll. The agenda 21 strategy is to bring down the wealthy countries and spread the wealth and what better vehicle than environmentalism. california of course will be the first guinea pig on cap and trade as they hasten their demise to bankruptcy.

EE AC's picture
EE AC 9 years 32 weeks ago
#2

Why can't GW be discussed without the right immediately concocting conspiracy theories or getting political?

Perhaps people really are concerned about preventing an environmental disaster and not just in "bringing down a wealthy nation". The ban of CFC's in the 70's met with similar opposition (Reagan in the 80's) yet it seems that this may have prevented a major catastrophe, don't overlook the possibility that environmentalists are correct on GW.

Kend's picture
Kend 9 years 32 weeks ago
#3

Hasn't the planet been changing tempature for millions of years. I am old enough to remember we when we going to spray the artic with an insulation because the planet was cooling to fast. Then the Ozone had a huge hole in it so we all going to burn to death. The fact is we have spent Trillions on global warming and it hasn't changed a thing except the bank accounts of th enviromentalists. What is even more disturbing is when ever the theory is challanged the scenitists are called names and there life is threatened. All sceince should be challenged shouldn't it? I have seen the ads about polar bears drowning because there is no ice. Come on, the polar bear population is growing yearly ever since people stopped buying furs there are more seals to eat than ever. There is no more cod left cause there is too many seals though. If it is true I guess poeple will just have to move north to "frozen lake land" where globel warming is a good thing. I can't imagine never having to shovel snow again. Longer growing season in the great white north, golfing year round. Hummmmmmmmm

ttdesigns's picture
ttdesigns 9 years 32 weeks ago
#4

Well, I agree with all Thom says in this post. But, ah, sigh, 2100? Isn't humanity going to be extinct before then?

Robindell's picture
Robindell 9 years 32 weeks ago
#5

I have to quibble with this post. On the one hand, you express concern through providing this information about people in far-away, relatively impoverished, largely costal Third World countries with respect to the future impact of global warming on their ability to continue living where they now reside. On the other hand, when it comes to talking about doing at least something to reduce carbon emissions in the United States, on today's show, you mentioned Tesla electric cars. I have not gone out of my way to research this company's products, and they certainly do not have an electric car dealership in my area. But from what I have heard, the price tag on their vehicles is very expensive. So the question is, why are environmentalist progressives willing to discuss the problems for poor people in Africa or some other tropical, costal region regarding global warming, but you ignore how unrealistic and impossible it would be for some member of the working poor in America to go out and buy a high-tech electric orsome other brand of electric car. According to a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, poor people often cannot even afford to buy a car, but when they can, they can only afford a used car. I when I was in college in Michigan went with some other guys to Lansing, your hometown, and went to used car lot and bought a used foreign import which turned out to be a lemon. What did I know about mechanical technicalities and how to check out a used car? According to the newspaper columnist, many of these working poor people end up with a high monthly payment for a high-mileage car, and often something goes wrong, and they cannot make the payments. In that instance, they lose all the money they paid up to that point, and the car. The last time I checked, I didn't notice any used electric cars at dealerships. The columnist points out that public transportation or car pooling or relying on relatives for a ride are not an option for many because they are unavailable in many cases, and that research studies have estimated the number of unemployed people who would likely be able to find some kind of a job if only one barrier were removed: that they could not afford a car to drive around applying for work. He also wrote that some time ago, an attempt was made by a member of Congress to create a federal car buying financial assistance program for low-income people, but that it went no where, and that some environmentalists complained that it would lead to more pollution. The poor would not be able to afford an alternative engergy vehicle and may become scapegoats in the future as they continue to drive cars with conventional internal combustion engines, unless there is some financially feasible alternative. Even if you had many electric cars, renewable energy only makes up a small percentage of electricity generation in the U.S. I am not sure what percentage of power plants use natural gas and what percentage rely on coal. My state is something like the third highest for having coal-powered electricity plants. The progressive approach, which criticizes conservatives for using fear-mongering to motivate their base, also relies on a certain degree of fear tactics. In my view, this is not the most effective approach. Technically and economically, alternative solutions are not readily available, and this is true not only in the U.S. but in many other countries, most notably, China, which has a thriving solar manufacturing industry by all accounts and whose government is aware of the problem.

leighmf's picture
leighmf 9 years 32 weeks ago
#6

Considering just the Ocean, 2/3 of the world, without UV radiation or pollution factors, the greatest unpredictable impact of GW is change of ocean salinity. There is an unknown potential volume of freshwater from melted ice which threatens us, since we don't know how fast the hidden ice is melting.

The ocean's circulation is thermo-haline driven. It needs salt. There may be models, but there is no actual data on which to base how lower salinity will affect ocean currents worldwide. But we know global change will be the result- because it's a big ocean.

If a lot of ice melts in a short time, we will not have to wait to the end of the century to see and feel the changes. That is not enough time for complex organisms to adapt.

Ocean circulation change could cause cold temperatures where it once was hot. The biota would not be adapted.

Currents are essential to the movement of ocean bacteria and plankton as the base of the food chain. Changes of salinity will alter the type bacterial communities of the ocean which provide nutrients for plankton. Bacteria can adapt quickly but how will this affect the food chain? A fish needs more time to change its feed. Would salt water organisms in a few years be able to live as fresh water organisms?

I can only say no to this, having spent personal quality time in fresh water swamps and brackish water swamps. The two communities couldn't be more different.

Changing the salinity of the ocean changes the foundation of our entire natural world. If it happens quickly, earth may revert to Kingdom Protista and start over from there at a new salinity.

So none of us are completely safe after all, not even the Bushes.

leighmf's picture
leighmf 9 years 32 weeks ago
#7

I agree that what we do with cars is ridiculous- no interest for the rich and exploitation of the poor. I'm against that.

I am an environmentalist by profession. We all drive small economy cars which we buy once until its ready for scrap. None of us can afford an electric car, a smart car, or a Tesla, but my client who destroyed a mangrove forest drives a Porsche SUV.

Most unprofitably, unless one becomes a professor, many of us have gone to a lot of trouble in school to understand nature. The courses aren't easy and we graduate to work for pretty low pay. Then we get lumped in with just anyone in unflattering phrases like "environmental progressives, " or "those damn environmentals."

I will probably be shot for my trouble someday. Just please don't lump this seriously concerned biological profession with activists and organizations which go over the top, often with not the same formal education.

Do I think the Peu Trust is cool? No. Have I ever hugged a tree? No. A man is much nicer, and more appropriate.

No Fraud's picture
No Fraud 9 years 32 weeks ago
#8

Look man this ain't about dismantleing Oil Companies...It's about changing our way of thinking. Climate Change isn't fiction...Nor is it entirely man's fault; man ethos are just another part of the equation, however, that being said, if we are to hold ourselves to being of some intellagence then I'd rather err on the side of caution and encourage Big Oil to get more involved with clean energy such as wind, solar, wave, and further its research and production with bio-fuels. As well, we need to raise the bar on fuel efficiency for both cars and trucks. The United States has fallen from grace, and when it comes to our Clean Energy Policies...Compared to Germany, Japan, China, France, Parts of S. America just to mention a few, we are a good 20 years behind. Why??? Here's my take; After WWII our government along with the oil indusrty begain to profit big on oil ivestments in the middle east. For a good 30 years this was Utopea for everyone. Supply was good, demand was high, and Prices were competitive and affordable. Then the crap hit the fan in the 70's...we all know this story Nixion, Pentagon Papers, then later the gas crisis, (Not that any of these issues were in connection with one another...the 70's just sucked). Never fear though the 80's were just around the corner...Reganomics, the deregulation of Wall St., Zero Tollerance Drug Policy, and once again cheap oil!!!Why would anyone in their right mind want to invest in some nutty science project to advance our technologies towards harnising energy from the Sun and the Wind?
You see there never has been some grand scheme to destroy the Oil Industry, just an alternative to help lessen the adverse effects which come with increased population, and waste. One thing the Oil Barrons can count on...Plastic, a by-product of crude oil, ain't going anywhere. As much as humans talk about lessening our enviromental foot print, we are surounded in plastic; our cars, our homes, appliences, stereos, phones, packaging, etc, etc. If Cotton is the fabric of our lives; then Plastic is the prefered material...And it lasts, and lasts, and lasts...Forever. It's cheap too! As the late great George Carlin so profoundly put it...Some day the Earth will shake us off like fleas and all that will be left is the Earth plus plastic, and it will be a whole new world.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 9 years 32 weeks ago
#9

It seems most climate change deniers belong to one political party. However the effects of climate change are obviously bipartisan. I wonder what goes through the minds of the oil barons as they glance upon their grandchildren, fast asleep in their cribs?

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 32 weeks ago
#10

I am not well versed on Global Warming and it appears neither are the people who have commented on the subject... But I find something quite astonishing while reading the comments. People like Global and Kend who are obviously Republican and/or conservative claim there is no global warming, even though a majority of scientists believe there is. And, people who tend to be more liberal or Democrats believe there is global warming, despite the findings of scientists that work for corporations. There can be no doubt that the glaciers are melting in places like Switzerland and the Artic and there are pictures to prove it, to mention just two. That statement is factual and you can Google that info. While nobody seems to site any actual scientific data to back up there comments, I will try to state only facts that can be confirmed. Global, just because there are more seals could be an indication the Polar Bears are not able to catch them since the Bears depend on ice sheets to hunt on for the seals, not in the open ocean as you apparently believe. Kend the Polar Bear population is shrinking year after year. This too is a fact that you can find out by researching versus your opinion which is based on the premise you live in an environment (frozen lake) that has not been affected yet. And it is very true that fresh water habitats do not do well when salt water intrudes. Also, I believe the people on the weather channel mentioned that the water temperature made a difference in the strength of a hurricane and how fast it is going, and that affects how much salt water will be deposited inland and how far inland it will go. One thing is certain, the Earth is slowly warming up and that will affect our weather conditions around the globe. Again this can be authenticated by checking the facts on Google versus you opinion which appears to be based on your political stance, right or left wing. Is the planet warming up naturally or are we hastening the increase in the planets temperature. If we continue and we are the source of global warming my grandchildren and their children are simply screwed because of our inability to agree on anything because we stick to our political party beliefs and always want that party to be right, even if it kills you and it looks that it may do just that....I have made one non –scientific observation here in Southern California, the beach sands have become smaller over the last 20 years to the point there is not much left. That could be construed that there is more water and less land or beach area to lie out on! Why I really do not know, but it could be more water due to the ice melting in the Artic!

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 32 weeks ago
#11

Global - If you think the United Nations agenda for article 21 is to transfer wealth you had better look it up. You are starting to sound like a real conspiracy nut. Your beginning to sound like another right winger who sees’s plots around every corner and makes comments here also....It might behoove you to seek some help concerning your paranoia...

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 9 years 32 weeks ago
#12

Hope you don't mind lots of company, Kend, up there in Canada when all the people in Central America, Mexico, and the US migrate up there to where the temperature is still bearable. You've all got plenty of room, right? Of course, I imagine you will have erected giant walls at the border to keep all of us peons out.

Ever watch the movie "1984"? Where when O'Brien straps a rat cage around Winston's face separated from the rats by only a door with a lever... O'Brien tells Winston that all he has to do is hold a flame up to the rat's side and then lift the lever, raising the door, and the rats, trying to escape the flames, would bury into Winston's face.

Electric or hybrid cars sound great on the surface but you still have to charge them and replace the very expensive reams of batteries (lead acid still?) periodically. That electricity you need to charge those batteries still has to be created by power plants...coal? oil? damns? nuclear? And, as has been mentioned already, there is a premium on these cars...what do you really save in the long run? What you don't spend in gasoline...you will still have to pay very high electrical bills and periodically pay high costs to replace the batteries. And you may not be polluting the atmosphere directly as when you burn gasoline but indirectly by whatever fuel the power plants uses... unless it is hydroelectric or solar.

guy dashnea's picture
guy dashnea 9 years 32 weeks ago
#13

It is unfortunate that Global has such a narrow vision. It is already obvious that outfits like Enron are trying to tie up the water supplys of the world. Or maybe it is that Global is just informationaly challanged. If Global would switch from Fox News to true information venues, he MIGHT see the world as it REALLY is.

EE AC's picture
EE AC 9 years 31 weeks ago
#14

Here's a few facts regarding fossil fuel consumption for the skeptics;

World daily gasoline consumption: 800 +/- million gallons

World daily coal consumption: 18,476,000 short tons

World daily Natural Gas consumption: 249.3 Billion cubic feet

You also have propane and other fossil fuels consumed on a daily basis. Then there is methane from the increased number of livestock to feed all of us.

These are all undeniable facts. C02, methane and water vapor are all on the increase in the atmosphere, another fact.

It's also a fact that never before in earths history (other than pre-historic times when active volcanos were everywhere) has there been this steady, daily production of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses.

Now doesn't it stand to reason that on a planet with an undeniable history of climate change, climate change very much based on the levels of these gasses in the atmosphere, that a steady manmade production of CO2 in vast quantities could alter our climate?

Global's picture
Global 9 years 31 weeks ago
#15

Hey Ken, look it up. UN Agenda 21 is real and it is in your face at the local level. Especially in California where "sustainable development" is there and is trying to force you to live in condensed areas in high rise apartment complexes. Also, the transfer of wealth comes as taxes on carbon and whatever else they can dream up will be funneled as payments to other countries to develop their economies. it is in the preamble 1.4. You should try to read some of the Agenda 21 and understand that the UN wants to one day be the world government. Agenda 21 is an absolute reality and the strategy is to come in from the environmental argument as that is the most effective vehicle for their propaganda machine. No conspiracy, just fact. In the words of the genius on MSLSD - Al no so Sharpton "resist we much".

No Fraud's picture
No Fraud 9 years 31 weeks ago
#16

I beg your pardon! Speak for yourself!!

I am very well versed in the areas of Global Warming and Climate Change, and the distinct difference between the two; as well as the connection.
Global warming has to do with a rise in ocean temperature. Now for as long as the Earth has had it's oceans there has been increases and decreases in temp.and it has effected Earths Atmosphere. Which brings us to climate change. Climate change is a result from how earths enviroment changes and the effects it has. Best example, even though all ideas are still just theory, is how the Dinosours became extinct. Something happened to change the climate, which in turn adversly effected most of life at that time.

Bottom line...The Earth has gone through many "enviromental" changes through out its history. Changes that have supported life and changes that have spoiled life. This was happening before, it is happening now and it will continue to happen on into the future.
As I mentioned in my other post, man is not to blame, even though his ways do add to the equation, mother nature is just doing her thing; we give her waste and she reacts.

However man's ego seems to think that it is our responsability to "save the planet". The only problem is, the planet is just fine. Instead of stroking our egos with pointless do gooder ideas we all need to work together at vastly reducing the amount of waste product we produce, as well as the type of waste. Two of the big ones are the waste we produce from coal and oil. And I don't think I need to get into what happens when nuclear power plants run a muck.

It all comes down to two things...Changing the way we think, and how we function.
For over 4 decades our science geeks have developed and been dialing in several technologies that would use clean sources of energy in order to power our homes and offices effectively and efficiently. As for reducing immisions from automobiles...Electric cars really are not a solution. UNLESS we are to use solar, wind, and wave energy. Currently most of our electric power is dirty, so even though electric cars are good in that they don't directly produce waste their source for power does. And if billions of cars are being pluged in everyday to power up...We might as well keep the path we are going.

Though I agree - for the most part - with reducing BIG government, this is one of the areas that I feel we need to have policy and regulation. Much like the dangers of unregulated capitalism, to not get on board with producing Clean Energy and Alternative bio fuels will not so much be the end of the planet as much as the end of humans.

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 31 weeks ago
#17

Global - You are still a right wing conspiracy theorists that believe there is this conspiracy by the United Nations to form its own world government and the one ruler conspiracy. I did look it up and it appears it is your interpretation that is different from those who disagree and are on the left or liberal point of view. To me you are just an angry right winger who see's conspiracy around every corner. You should get together with Fraud and Palindromedary and compare notes about all the conspiracies you see in our government and the World in general, it should make a good comedy to read...

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 31 weeks ago
#18

Fraud - If you would take the time to read my comment you will see I was speaking for myself and my observation of how the two different political mindsets generally determine what you believe! Furthermore you have not provided one iota of evidence to support your theory. Basically you are rattling off the same info most of us learned in the 9th. grade of high school. Of course this planet has gone through billions of years of evolution and change. Most scientist believe there was a collision on earth hundreds of millions of years ago that wiped out most species on the Earth, not some weather changes unless you put that in the category of weather, the Earth being hit by a large meteor! l No Fraud, (which I find a little funny after reading your comments) have you ever heard of clean burning natural gas? This would eliminate the carbon pollution that is warming up our planet. But the right wingers seem to follow their corporate politicians and believe this is just another phase the planet we call home is going through, because it benefits those who keep them in power, the source of our pollution the multi-national corporations you how is such great esteem. Wake up and use that part of your brain that does not run automatically on your need to follow your corrupt political corporate hero's in Washington and listen to the World's scientific community that has not been bought off by the corporate crooks. Again you guys on the right shout out it is the big bad and overly large federal government that is to blame. If it was not for the laws passed in Washington under President Johnson our kids would not be able to play outside and still be able to breathe. The government you hate so much was responsible for the Clean Air Act that cut corporate pollution way down while putting regulations into effect to save the air you and you right wing conspiracy theorists breathe each day! And guess what we did not fold up and kill our economy, on the contrary we introduced new technology that the geeks invented and created more jobs. When will you right wingers stop following your Republican gods in Washington and think for yourself....

No Fraud's picture
No Fraud 9 years 31 weeks ago
#19

Hi Ken, Thank you for your response. A couple things I want to clear up before we have further discussions on important issues. First I want to make it clear that I am not motivated by Left or Right wing political agendas. I am N.P.A. The stance I take on different issues have noting to do with political partys. That you take my comments as being "right winger" rhetoric confuses me since I don't agree with neocon ideologies. The only thing conservative about me is I do believe that; One gets what one works for, and nothing is guarenteed except death. However, life can be cruel and bad things happen to good people. That being said, it is my opinion that all to often society makes life more unfair than it already is. Right or Left, todays political figures are the problem. In my opinion there isn't a great leader amongst them. They're all a bunch of corrupt businessmen and lawers playing golf with BIG BUSINESS while discussing ways of carving up this country for profit. To answer your question; Yes I am framilar with natural gas. In my town all of the police cars run on clean burning gas...and have been doing so since the 80's. I am not apposed to this resource, however there is no sense in harnessing natural gas if we have to do so in destructive ways that have long term adverse effects. Yes I have heard of the meteor theory, and no I don't consider that to be "weather", but the results of a huge meteor hitting the earth would contribute to a change in the climate which would effect weather. And I think you misunderstand me when it comes to the natural cycles of climate change. We cannot change these natural cycles, nor should we try; for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. BUT and it is a big but...We have the knowledge and abilities to start using all the clean energy resource that you claim to have known about since 9th grade...So what gives???I was in 9th grade 27 years ago; which at that time we were already behind in utilizing solar, and wind power. The countries that starting utilizing clean energy sources back then have advanced further on the technology. My wife works for a solar company here in Fl. where we have lots of long sunny days, but the cost of purchasing and installing PV panels along with domestic hot water panels cost on average of 25k to 50k depending on how many kilowatts a house hold uses. High costs like this with very few and ill funded rebate programms has kept most people from installing Solar for their homes. Those that do run on solar power RAVE about it. Here in my town most of the county adminastration buildings run on solar. Solar works...If we can influence our Government to rewrite an Energy Policy that would help more people to install Solar more people would, and it would take the trendiness out of the idea making it more about true conservation through common sense. Now that is green kool.

riverside's picture
riverside 9 years 31 weeks ago
#20

I agree Thom

Any time you take a carbon fuel from the ground and add it to the air, it adds to the normal carbon generated by the planet. People say this imbalance is normal and can be handled by the planet. I don't see those results. I've been watching the midwest weather patterns for 46 years.

In the last 20 years I notice that the spikes of rising temperature when the sun is out, have become very sharp. This year we haven't had a decent rainfall for almost 6 months in the midwest USA. The weather was NEVER like this! No water=no food=war over food. And local wars WON'T affect the rich how?? Do the rich have a spare planet Thom?

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 31 weeks ago
#21

Well said, good reply. I still do not agree with your analogy of Global Warming and why we find ourselves in this era of destructive changing weather. My read on what is happening is not just another natural change in weather patterns. Sandy is a prime example of Global Warming and what a change of just a few degrees in ocean temperature does to produce this type of storm. My personal belief on why solar energy is not as well spread as it should be is the politicians answer to their masters in the multi-national oil industries and have done all they can to make sure solar energy develops as slow as possible. It is my understanding we have an abundance of natural (clean burning) gas and in a few years we will be able to use it to fuel industry as well as our cars and homes with a minimal foot print on the environment. I live in S. California with the same type of excellent weather for solar power as Fl. and yet we too are not using the full potential. This can also be said for wind power and other alternative forms of energy that the large oil companies try to stop because it will eventually cut their profit margin down. So much for help from Washington in obtaining our freedom from big oil. Your comments have led me to believe you were conservative and followed the agenda of the Repub’s. As you can tell I am not fond of that particular political party and their motivations. I belong to the Independent Party and voted for Dr. Stein in the last presidential election. Have a great holiday and good talking with you

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 31 weeks ago
#22

Have a good Holiday..

SHFabian's picture
SHFabian 9 years 31 weeks ago
#23

Can't do anything about it. First, Americans just aren't that into caring about the poor. The poor in foreign nations are a little more acceptable, since they don't have the good fortune of living in a country with a flawless economic system, like ours. But still. Secondly, global warming itself can't be solved until maybe the next generation. America's leading contribution to global warming is traffic fumes -- our excessive use of privately owned motor vehicles. It is the oil particles in the air that causes global warming. (It's also the actual leading cause of all lung disease, since the most carcinogenic type of smoke is the kind that contains oil particles). But what choice do we have but to drive? Walk? Use public transportation? Like poor people? Oh, please.

SHFabian's picture
SHFabian 9 years 31 weeks ago
#24

I'm in Wisconsin (57 yrs.). We have the same weather as always -- just more so. Hotter heat, colder cold, sandwhiched in between fierce storms and tornados, floods and droughts. This might sound odd, but one of the things that are the most unsettling to me: I've lived rurally all my life, and in recent years I'll sometimes come across an insect that I'd never seen before. So, I look it up and find that it's normal habitat is Arizona, Mexico, etc.

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Today, we are closing Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann is a creative thinker and committed small-d democrat. He has dealt with a wide range of topics throughout his life, and this book provides an excellent cross section. The Thom Hartmann Reader will make people both angry and motivated to act."
Dean Baker, economist and author of Plunder and Blunder, False Profits, and Taking Economics Seriously
From Screwed:
"Once again, Thom Hartmann hits the bull’s eye with a much needed exposé of the so-called ‘free market.’ Anyone concerned about the future of our nation needs to read Screwed now."
Michael Toms, Founding President, New Dimensions World Broadcasting Network and author of A Time For Choices: Deep Dialogues for Deep Democracy
From Screwed:
"I think many of us recognize that for all but the wealthiest, life in America is getting increasingly hard. Screwed explores why, showing how this is no accidental process, but rather the product of conscious political choices, choices we can change with enough courage and commitment. Like all of Thom’s great work, it helps show us the way forward."
Paul Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While