Look, I get why people care about climate policy. I really do. I live on this planet too. But here's the thing — I grew up in a town where the factory shut down because of environmental regulations. People lost their homes, their dignity. You can't ask a family worried about putting food on the table to care about carbon targets first. Economic growth pays for everything — healthcare, education, even the research that makes cleaner energy possible. We need money to solve these problems. If we choke off growth now, we're just creating a poorer world that can't adapt to anything. It's not about ignoring climate change. It's about being smart enough to walk and chew gum at the same time.

So 113A is saying we need to prioritize climate policy, right? But here's the thing — we've already seen what happens when you put climate first. Germany's Energiewende cost billions and their emissions barely dropped. Meanwhile, they're firing up coal plants again. That's not progress, that's expensive theater. You can't build a green future on a broken economy. No country ever decarbonized its way to prosperity. They grew first, then cleaned up. The US, Europe, Japan — they all got rich on cheap energy. Now they're telling developing nations to skip that step? That's not fair. If we choke growth today, we've got less money for climate adaptation tomorrow. It's that simple. You need a strong economy to afford the transition. Put growth first, then tackle emissions. Anything else is just putting the cart before the horse.

Look at what happened in Sri Lanka. They went all-in on green policies, banned chemical fertilizers overnight to go organic. Crop yields collapsed, the economy cratered, and now they're burning more fossil fuels than ever just to survive. That's not a climate win. 113A keeps saying we agree, but we clearly don't. You want to prioritize climate policy. I want to prioritize growth so we can actually afford climate policy. There's a difference. A rich country can invest in carbon capture, in better grids, in adaptation. A poor one can't. You're asking nations to put the expensive solution before the thing that pays for it. That math doesn't work. Economic growth first. Then we clean up. It's just common sense.

Look at China. They lifted 800 million people out of poverty by prioritizing growth first. Now they're the world's biggest investor in renewables. That's the right order. You can't skip the growth step and expect to fund green tech. 113A keeps dodging this. Germany's green experiment cost billions, and their coal plants are running again. Sri Lanka's organic farming disaster left people hungry. These aren't edge cases - they're warnings. You say we agree, but we don't. You want climate policy to lead. I want economic growth to lead so we can actually pay for climate solutions. A broke nation can't afford solar panels or carbon capture. A growing one can. It's not complicated. Grow the pie first, then decide how to slice it. Put the cart before the horse and you're just stuck on the road.