>Colder places like New England might see an economic upturn — for example, from lower heating bills. But places that are already hot, like the South and Midwest, could see huge damage to their local economies, due to enormous electric bills, dying crops or mass migration away from the area.
>Maybe that is not so surprising, but Hsiang takes it a step further: Climate change will redistribute wealth by driving workers, businesses and agriculture away from those hard-hit regions and move them mostly toward the north and west of the country. Again, Hsiang says exactly how much is hard to predict. But he says that is actually part of the new study's findings: "When you start changing the climate," he says, "it starts affecting all these aspects of the economy, and it makes the future world harder to predict."
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/29/534896130/mapping-the-potential-economic-effects-of-climate-change
Looks like climate change will have the worst consequences for the south and the midwest while liberal states reap the benefits. Rural and suburban retards BTFO by their own president. Thanks, Drumpfy.
>>131892515
>by 2100
That's over 80 years away.