A climate solution where all sides can win | Ted Halstead

In this video

Why are we so deadlocked on climate, and what would it take to overcome the seemingly insurmountable barriers to progress? Policy entrepreneur Ted Halstead proposes a transformative solution based on the conservative principles of free markets and limited government. Learn more about how this carbon dividends plan could trigger an international domino effect towards a more popular, cost-effective and equitable climate solution.

The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world’s leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more.

Follow TED on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/TEDTalks
Like TED on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TED

Subscribe to our channel: https://www.youtube.com/TED

About The Author

TED The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more. You're welcome to link to or embed these videos, forward them to others and share these ideas with people you know. TED's videos may be used for non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons License, Attribution–Non Commercial–No Derivatives (or the CC BY – NC – ND 4.0 International) and in accordance with our TED Talks Usage Policy (https://www.ted.com/about/our-organization/our-policies-terms/ted-talks-usage-policy). For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film or online course), please submit a Media Request at https://media-requests.ted.com

Our editors think you might like these...

Channels Have This Video

Comment (706)

  1. What exactly makes this conservative? Because it's more market based over government driven? So? It's still the government giving people money… a dividend… which is what Andrew Yang's campaign was about. Yet it was embraced more by left/democrats, same with the pioneers of a UBI/citizen dividend like MLK and man others. This is apparently seen as socialism by today's modern republican party.
    Nothing in America is going to work without the market and the government in some balance. Perhaps the government provides an oversight or an incentive and the market comes up with the solutions- tech, etc. That's fine. That's sort of how it already works. Issue he's presenting here is incentivizing both the people and the market.
    This is hardly "republican" in the modern era. It's not entirely LEFT but it's more centrist. Limited areas of government isn't exactly something that only right leaning people believe. And to be fair, the future isn't going to work by operating on ONE system of CAPITALISM, SOCIALISM, etc. It has to be a combination of of the best aspects of all of them.

  2. Sad to finally meet this Angel on the day I find out he has passed away. Ted's life and legacy will continue to inspire those of us who are seeking authentic solutions to real problems in a very troubled world. One way we can honor Ted is to take the torch from his hand and carry it a little bit further down the road, whatever the path we find ourselves on.. Thanks Ted for shining the light of awareness from your soul so that we may have the opportunity to see the true path ahead. RIP Brother. You have earned it.

  3. Because we know corporations are so good about paying their taxes in the U.S.? Besides, a carbon tax for the exchange of all regulations and pre-existing gas taxes with none of the gains invested into alternative energy solutions? Yeah, ima hard pass that. And who, exactly, is going to be in charge of dispersing these dividends? And how did he calculate that 243 million Americans would get more money than they put into it? I'm sure it just took some simple analysis based on his proposal, but I'd like to see it.

  4. Hey, I'm ALL-IN for anything that can motivate Republicans to take climate change seriously. But there is some serious slight of hand in this talk. Free market?? Limited government?? Are you kidding me?? This is a government tax, transformed into a government-issued dividend!! It's Obama's approach, except rather than trusting government to use the tax $ for the benefit of all, it puts a check into individuals' hands (using government workers and cost, BTW). Now, if that extra cost works to make all of us cheer for a climate change solution, then it would be worthwhile and a good thing. But let's stop pretending that it's a Republican idea, free market, or limited government.

    Next, you can't have a positive cyclical effect if the people receiving the dividend and the people making the big choices on tons of CO2 are different people. In fact, if a check is an incentive, it's actually an incentive for MORE carbon use (which would put more moeny in our pockets.) It is clever to raise the tax rate as emissions decline, but that would not translate into more money for individuals unless businesses were using more carbon!! So it's really a tough sell to claim this is a positive cycle.

    Final comment on sleight of hand: 36 cents/gallon increased gas cost sounds not so awful at the pump. But let's not pretend that it wouldn't have ripple effects on everything in the economy that requires energy–trucking, freight trains/planes, tractors, bus & plane fare, postal service, machine production etc.–and so raise consumer costs throughout the economy. Possibly offset by a dividend for some, but probably not by much. We need to face the fact that the transition away from fossil fuels WILL cost us something, but will be worth it.

    Now if a monthly check and a bunch of lies about the free market and limited government allows that to happen, I'll hold my nose and go along with it. But the rhetoric in this talk does stink!!!