PEOPLE GET READY is apparently the title of a new book by John Nichols? And I imagine, in due course, that that author/speaker will be a guest on Thom's show.
Elsewhere on the internet (via The Hartmann Report] a recent article there states, "In the past, rapid increases in greenhouse gases have been associated with mass extinctions." In other words; This time man took something good (i.e., Earth's ecosystem) and is literally killing it.
In summation, along with my other like pedestrian-impressionistic offerings, what I concluded is that after the past century or so of soaring upwards by billions (in apparently a perfectly parabolic ascent) total global human populaltion could reverse in an equally (pick your adjective) dramatic, frightening, catstrophic, horrific, unimaginable, biblical, "whoosh!" collapse, resulting in a net population reduction in the multi-billions, bottoming-out (just guessing, of course) by around 2175 at 4 to 5 billion, down from the current population level of +7 billion.
LOOSE TRANSLATION: In relation to past/historical events; Things could get really ugly. And, by the way, here in the U.S. the formulation/mechanisms for how those rapid reductions in [human/animal] populations could occur (as Thom describes almost daily) is seemingly relatively obvious:
>> Manufacturing base (i.e., jobs) shipped overseas,
>> The robotics/automation revolution
>> Easy availablilty to average citizens (i.e., weak regulation) weapons-of-war
>> Government policies (driven by BIG pharama $$$ agenda) pumps lots of lioke 'crazy making' prescription drugs into the mix.
>> Dumbed-down public education curriculum ...
>> GMO's (if that's a thing)
>> Armies from 'K Street' manipulate Federal & State governments to undermine faith in government policies/institutions.
>> Corporate controlled mainstream [news/entertainment/social] media
>> Public/private debt ratio imbalances (In other words; Are there any assets left on the planet that Wall Street hasn't leveraged-up (i.e. Put a bird on?)
>> Financial derivatives liabilities (I assume - see 'Crash of 2016')
So I contend here that if [hypothetically] a 'President HRC' along with Democrats in Congress (co-lead by Brenie) want to be most effective at governing, then they should focus on triage.
Although granted non-nuclear, just in my lifetime there have many destructive wars not only, in effect, on the natural environment, but (as Thom often describes) also on middle/working class American's, and [arguably needlessly] on Iraq, and Vietnam, back to 50's coup in Iran.
So regarding where Democrats devote any newly won political capital; Subsidizing renewable energy, okay. But another like classic Washington head fake of [over] promising to 'reverse global warming'?
Again, after the moon landing program, yeah concievably in JFK's 2nd term (or a following RFK administration) a next BIG idea, i.e., meaningfully slowing of global warming, might have been a more (verses now - tragically) realistic federal government policy objective.
Instead, facing serious/consequencial risk from climate-change that science (and seemingly Hollywood too) confirms is happening here/now, a President HRC, along with Democrats in Congress, could/should focus on providing effective triage for humans (imagine current Syrian refugee crisis x100) and of course, where practical, triage for endangered species, ocean habitats, etc.
FOOTNOTE: Triage here exampled by contrast between promising a messianic-style salavation for all (think Obama for prez 2008) verses in more practical terms, programs that provide meaningful relief to a larger segment of the population than (for example) TARP program beneficiaries (i.e., the ultra-wealthy/powerful/connected global elites.