A recent poll indicates that most Australians want the government to take stronger action on climate change to protect against extreme weather events like bushfires. The survey found that 77 percent of people believe stronger climate action is needed, while only 13 percent think the government should do less.

A report from the Productivity Commission highlighted that ignoring climate risks could cost the economy an additional $26 billion over the next two decades. This report also predicted that Australia would face more very hot days, longer fire seasons, heavy rain over short periods, rising sea levels, coastal flooding, and stronger tropical cyclones. Without any adaptation measures, the cost of a harsher climate is expected to rise from $9 billion in 2023 to $35 billion by 2050. The report also noted that disasters have lasting effects on people's health, education, and earnings.

The government is expected to announce its target for 2035 by September, following advice from the Climate Change Authority. Experts suggest that setting a strong climate target for 2035 will help protect Australians from climate-related harm and create new jobs and economic opportunities. They also pointed out that climate action and renewable energy have been popular with voters in recent federal elections, and concerns about extreme weather are growing. It was also stated that politicians cannot afford to ignore the impact on people losing their lives, savings, and homes, and that denying climate change will be met with disapproval at the ballot box.

Original article

This article provides no actionable information for a normal person to do right now. It discusses government targets and economic forecasts, but offers no personal steps or safety tips.

The article offers some educational depth by presenting statistics on public opinion and economic costs associated with climate change. It explains the predicted impacts of a harsher climate, such as increased extreme weather events, and quantifies potential economic losses. However, it lacks deeper explanations of the underlying scientific processes or detailed breakdowns of how the economic figures were derived.

The topic has personal relevance as it discusses the potential impacts of climate change on Australians, including economic costs and health effects, which can influence future living conditions, safety, and potentially financial well-being.

The article does not serve a public service function by providing official warnings, safety advice, or emergency contacts. It primarily reports on a poll and a commission report without offering direct public assistance or tools.

The advice mentioned, such as setting strong climate targets, is directed at the government and not practical for individual action. Therefore, the advice is not useful for a normal person.

The article has the potential for long-term impact by highlighting the economic consequences of inaction on climate change, which could influence future policy and personal financial planning related to climate resilience.

The emotional impact of the article is likely to be mixed. While it highlights growing concerns and potential negative consequences, it also points to the potential for new jobs and economic opportunities through climate action, which could foster a sense of hope and agency. However, without actionable steps, it might also lead to feelings of helplessness.

The article does not appear to use clickbait or ad-driven words. The language is factual and informative, focusing on reporting poll results and commission findings.

A missed chance to teach or guide is evident in the lack of practical advice for individuals. The article could have provided information on how individuals can reduce their carbon footprint, prepare for extreme weather events, or find resources for climate adaptation. For example, a normal person could find better information by visiting government climate change websites, looking up local emergency preparedness guides, or researching renewable energy options for their homes.

The text describes a situation where the majority of Australians are calling for stronger action to address climate change and its impacts, particularly to safeguard against extreme weather events. This call for action is rooted in the desire to protect the well-being and future of their communities, including the most vulnerable members such as children and the elderly.

The potential consequences of inaction are dire and far-reaching. The report highlights the economic costs of climate change, which will undoubtedly impact the resources available to families and communities. Rising sea levels, more frequent and intense weather events, and longer fire seasons will disrupt the stability and safety of local environments, threatening the homes, livelihoods, and lives of clan members.

The effects of climate change also extend to the health and education of community members, further undermining their ability to thrive and contribute to the continuity of the clan. Without adaptation measures, the costs will continue to rise, straining the resources and resilience of families and communities.

The text also alludes to the political implications of climate action, suggesting that politicians must heed the concerns of their constituents or face electoral consequences. This dynamic underscores the importance of local voices and the need for leaders to act in the best interests of their communities, especially when it comes to matters of survival and the protection of kin.

If the ideas and behaviors described in the text are not heeded, the consequences for families and communities are severe. The erosion of local environments and resources will weaken the ability of families to provide for and protect their members, especially the most vulnerable. The disruption of education and health will hinder the development and potential of future generations, undermining the clan's ability to thrive and continue.

The breakdown of community trust and the shifting of family responsibilities onto distant authorities will further fracture the social fabric, diminishing the collective strength and resilience needed to face the challenges of a changing climate. The continuity of the people and the stewardship of the land are at stake, and without a renewed commitment to local kinship bonds and responsibilities, the survival of the clan is threatened.

In conclusion, the ideas and actions described in the text are essential for the protection and continuity of families, communities, and the land they steward. Failure to address climate change and its impacts will lead to a breakdown of the very foundations that have kept human peoples alive: the protection of kin, the preservation of resources, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. It is a matter of survival, and the consequences of inaction are clear and dire.

The text uses strong emotional words to push a certain viewpoint. For example, it says "politicians cannot afford to ignore the impact on people losing their lives, savings, and homes." This language aims to make readers feel scared and pressured to agree with the need for climate action. It highlights the negative consequences in a way that might sway opinions without presenting a balanced view of potential solutions or their costs.

The text presents a strong opinion as if it were a universally accepted fact. It states, "denying climate change will be met with disapproval at the ballot box." This is a prediction framed as a certainty, suggesting that voters will definitely punish politicians who don't agree with a specific stance on climate change. It doesn't allow for the possibility of other voter concerns or motivations.

There is a bias in how information is presented to favor one side. The text focuses heavily on the negative economic impacts of ignoring climate change, such as the "$26 billion" cost and rising expenses from $9 billion to $35 billion. It also mentions that "disasters have lasting effects on people's health, education, and earnings." This emphasis on negative outcomes serves to support the argument for stronger climate action.

The text uses a persuasive technique by linking climate action to positive outcomes for the economy and voters. It suggests that "setting a strong climate target for 2035 will help protect Australians from climate-related harm and create new jobs and economic opportunities." It also notes that "climate action and renewable energy have been popular with voters." This connects the desired action to benefits that appeal to a broad audience, making the proposed action seem more desirable.

The text conveys a sense of concern and urgency regarding climate change. This is evident in phrases like "protect against extreme weather events like bushfires" and the report's prediction of "more very hot days, longer fire seasons, heavy rain over short periods, rising sea levels, coastal flooding, and stronger tropical cyclones." The mention of potential economic costs, such as "$26 billion over the next two decades" and the rise in disaster costs from "$9 billion in 2023 to $35 billion by 2050," also contributes to this feeling of worry. The impact on people's lives, including "lasting effects on people's health, education, and earnings," and the stark reality of "people losing their lives, savings, and homes," amplifies this concern.

This emotional tone serves to highlight the seriousness of the climate situation and the potential negative consequences of inaction. It aims to create a sense of worry in the reader, prompting them to recognize the risks involved. By detailing the financial and personal tolls of climate change, the message seeks to build a strong case for government intervention. The writer uses descriptive language, such as "extreme weather events" and "harsher climate," to paint a vivid picture of the challenges ahead. The repetition of the idea that ignoring climate risks has significant costs, both economic and human, reinforces the urgency.

Furthermore, the text expresses a sentiment of hope and opportunity linked to taking action. This is seen in the expert suggestion that "setting a strong climate target for 2035 will help protect Australians from climate-related harm and create new jobs and economic opportunities." The mention of "renewable energy have been popular with voters" and that "politicians cannot afford to ignore the impact" suggests a belief in the possibility of positive change and a public appetite for it. This emotional appeal aims to inspire action by presenting climate action not just as a necessity but also as a pathway to a better future. The writer persuades by framing climate action as a popular and beneficial choice, suggesting that denying it will lead to "disapproval at the ballot box." This implies that taking action is not only the right thing to do but also the politically wise choice, thereby encouraging a shift in opinion and behavior.