i wonder what his stance on the now-annual wildfires are.

We've always had issues with wild fires, economists will give 0 fucks anyway as Sydney, or Melboure is not burning.

As another example, dipshits like Nordhaus think Agriculture is unimportant as its only a small part of GDP. That eating is vital need seems to have escaped them.

https://theintercept.com/2023/10/29/william-nordhaus-climate-economics/

Ignorance of systems has its way of plowing forward, juggernaut-like. Nordhaus has opined that agriculture is “the part of the economy that is sensitive to climate change,” but because it accounts for just 3 percent of national output, climate disruption of food production cannot produce a “very large effect on the U.S. economy.” It is unfortunate for his calculations that agriculture is the foundation on which the other 97 percent of GDP depends. Without food — strange that one needs to reiterate this — there is no economy, no society, no civilization. Yet Nordhaus treats agriculture as indifferently fungible.