Will Making More Bank Save the Planet?
It sure doesn't look like it
One of the foundational tenets of modern economic thinking and the Greatest Story Ever Told (GSET) has long been this comforting little narrative: as nations grow wealthier, they naturally begin to care more about the environment. The logic goes something like, “Once people have their basic needs met, they suddenly develop a taste for organic avocados, national parks, and breathable air.” Of course, as we’ve discussed, this ignores most of our species’ cultural experiments that met their basic needs with nature. But I digress.
The fact is, is, for a while, it kind of made sense—during an era of globalization, progressive governance with actual teeth, and international cooperation that at least pretended to agree on minimum environmental standards. I, for one, certainly drank the Kool-Aid…
But I’ve had to pause and ask: does that logic really hold up in today’s geopolitics? In countries like the US or Hungary? And is there any empirical evidence to support the idea that it takes wealth for people to care about environmental protection?
Let’s start with some hors d’oeuvres from the reactionary feast being served up in the planet’s wealthiest jurisdiction - the US:
Forestry
The Bright Idea:
The Trump administration has moved to increase logging in national forests while loosening species and environmental protections—paired with plans to slash thousands of Forest Service jobs. In other words, who needs standing forests?
The Real-World Reality:
Only 25% of the original U.S. forest cover remains. Just 4% of old-growth forest is still standing. So yes, clearly what’s missing here is more chainsaws.
Fisheries
The Bright Idea:
Plans to suspend or revise regulations that "burden" commercial fishing while reviewing (read: shrinking) the boundaries of protected marine areas, like the Pacific Island Heritage National Marine Monument.
The Real-World Reality:
Meanwhile, close to 35% of the world’s fisheries are already overfished, and another 57% are being exploited at their maximum sustainable limit. That leaves a generous 8% of global fisheries that aren’t being pushed to the brink. Maybe we don’t need to ‘cast a wider net”?!
Endangered Species Act
The Bright Idea:
A redefinition of “harm” to allow for the destruction of species’ critical habitats—because apparently, you can’t hurt what you bulldoze if it doesn’t scream.
The Real-World Reality:
Endangered species need their habitats to survive—radical, I know. We're in the midst of the Sixth Great Extinction, and somehow, the plan is to redefine the legal meaning of harm. If plastics do reach the brain, this would be an indication.
Electric Vehicles
The Bright Idea:
Eliminating the $7,500 EV subsidy and replacing it with incentives for 100-year-old gas and diesel technology. Charging infrastructure? Not a priority.
The Real-World Reality:
You can’t have an energy transition without electrifying transport. Early-stage support is how all game-changing tech gets off the ground—and EVs are no exception. Oh, and without EVs, I’m not too sure those metals are ‘critical.’
Renewables
The Bright Idea:
Axe those offshore wind projects. And tax incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act? Likely on the chopping block too. Add to that tariffs on foreign solar panels—some as high as 3,500%—and you've got a solid strategy for making renewable power a thing that only more advanced nations use. What energy transition?
The Real-World Reality:
Renewables aren’t just cleaner—they’re often the fastest to deploy and deliver the lowest cost per kilowatt hour. And considering we still need dramatic emissions reductions and now even more power, sabotaging renewables now is a bit like setting fire to your lifeboat because you don’t like the paint job.
Deep Sea Mining:
The Bright Idea:
In a Herculean effort to expand “drill, baby, drill” to quite literally everything, the plan now includes fast-tracking deep sea mining permits—and ignoring silly things like national boundaries (51st state?😒).
The Real-World Reality:
We barely understand deep sea ecosystems—and what little we do know suggests they’re incredibly unique, fragile, and worth protecting. I mean, Will Smith is even pumped to check them out. But in an economy that recognizes no boundaries—geographic, ecological, or ethical—it seems determined to push those limits ever further into the abyss.
Wait, haven’t we seen this movie?!
So you get the idea—and it’s not just the U.S. where other living things are taking a back seat. Right-wing populist governments elsewhere have taken up the same script—different stage, same plot.
Take Hungary: under President Orbán, the government abolished the environmental ministry, banned wind energy, and increased logging. All this from a country that ranks 28th globally in terms of financial assets per capita—not exactly struggling.
Similar trends are playing out closer to home in Ontario and Alberta and further afield in the Netherlands and Argentina. The message is consistent: economic nostalgia dressed up as innovation, wrapped in populist rhetoric, and delivered with a bulldozer.
Federally here in Canada, we narrowly dodged a national government that seemed keen to replicate the environmental rollbacks of its provincial cousins and Stateside mentor—recycling tired claims that competitiveness depends on pretending the 1980s never ended.
Survey says….
Here’s the kicker: the idea that people need to “get rich” before they care about the environment doesn’t hold up in the academic literature either. Surveys consistently show that lower-income groups are just as environmentally concerned as their wealthier counterparts—maybe even more so.
The difference lies in how environmental degradation is experienced. For low-income communities, it shows up in health risks, lost income, and limited access to clean air and water. For the wealthier? It’s often about property values, views, or not being able to heli-ski as close to the remnants of that glacier.
This is more than a quirk—it’s a communications blueprint. If we want a truly inclusive environmental movement, we need to stop selling glacier preservation for skiing to people worried about whether their tap water is drinkable or even available. Same glacier, different take.
How to make a Toxic Stew
Key Ingredients:
Mature democracy? Check.
Rising wealth inequality? Check.
Slowing growth rates? Check
Populist politics? Double-check.
Turns out, this combination is the opposite of a green formula. You could say it’s a recipe to go all ‘cave man,’ but as you know if you’re keeping up with Financing the Anthropocene, that’s overly insulting to our ancestors.
Regardless of GDP, net worth, or asset rankings, when wealth concentrates and populism rises, environmental stewardship gets tossed under the bus (likely a diesel one) for dreams of economic yesteryear.
The best things in life were free…
The next time you hear someone say that getting richer is the way to achieving ecological bliss, don’t blame them—it’s not their fault - after all, doctrines die hard. Just remind them we’ve been reading from the GSET script for 70 years or so, and if it was going to deliver well-adjusted societies and healthy environments, it probably would have by now. Governments focused on churning out even more wealth will have to ensure it doesn’t stay at the top 1%; otherwise, it doesn’t guarantee anything - not a functioning society nor a healthy planet.
Ironically, the best things in life were once free—after all, there were no capital raises for old-growth forests, fisheries, or wildlife; that's why it’s called nature’s bounty. Pretending that the disenfranchised will be helped by using up the little that’s protected is a sign that the jig is up - growth is slowing, and the trickle-down effect has turned into a sad drip. Where we should be applying all our talents to nurture the nature that has had our back for thousands of years, we’re instead doubling down.
But this is how it always goes when things begin to change. As Queen Cersei, of the ruling House Lannister, noted, all the while aware of her potential to be a footnote in time,
Power is Power… I do things because they feel good. I killed your High Sparrow and all his little sparrows. Game of Thrones