<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>graaben</author><text>Exactly. It reminds me of the &amp;quot;I&amp;#x27;ll be gone, you&amp;#x27;ll be gone&amp;quot; mentality of Wall Street in the mid-2000s. As long as these new developments are sold to buyers&amp;#x2F;investors now, the risk is transferred away from the developers and their incentive to build remains. And the demand isn&amp;#x27;t going to dry up any time soon with tons of cash from South America coming into Miami every day.&lt;p&gt;There will be a day of reckoning soon when the next major hurricane hits and all of these new developments are damaged beyond repair. Miami got very lucky with Matthew a few months ago, but the next one is really going to hurt today&amp;#x27;s buyers.</text><parent_chain><item><author>adevine</author><text>The answer to this question is quite simple, and the two choice sentences from the article:&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;And their time frame is what, five years? How do you reconcile those two things: It’s a 100-year problem and a five-year investment cycle.&amp;quot; The answer is simply that the private equity firm does not account for the long term, but that the city of Miami Beach will have to—soon.&lt;p&gt;And that is fundamentally what makes climate change so difficult to deal with. The economic incentives, which only really look 5-10-15 years out, can&amp;#x27;t respond to consequences that are 50-100 years out, and by then it&amp;#x27;s really too late.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why Are Developers Still Pouring Billions into Waterlogged Miami?</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-29/why-are-developers-still-pouring-billions-into-waterlogged-miami</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>cr0sh</author><text>&amp;gt; And that is fundamentally what makes climate change so difficult to deal with. The economic incentives, which only really look 5-10-15 years out, can&amp;#x27;t respond to consequences that are 50-100 years out, and by then it&amp;#x27;s really too late.&lt;p&gt;On the global level (let&amp;#x27;s say 50-100 years out), do you think we as a species are headed toward an &amp;quot;Easter Island&amp;quot; effect, where we &amp;quot;whistle past the graveyard&amp;quot; and assume everything is &amp;quot;fine&amp;quot; - until it isn&amp;#x27;t - and at that point we can&amp;#x27;t do anything and have to deal with the potentially existential consequences?</text><parent_chain><item><author>adevine</author><text>The answer to this question is quite simple, and the two choice sentences from the article:&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;And their time frame is what, five years? How do you reconcile those two things: It’s a 100-year problem and a five-year investment cycle.&amp;quot; The answer is simply that the private equity firm does not account for the long term, but that the city of Miami Beach will have to—soon.&lt;p&gt;And that is fundamentally what makes climate change so difficult to deal with. The economic incentives, which only really look 5-10-15 years out, can&amp;#x27;t respond to consequences that are 50-100 years out, and by then it&amp;#x27;s really too late.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why Are Developers Still Pouring Billions into Waterlogged Miami?</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-29/why-are-developers-still-pouring-billions-into-waterlogged-miami</url></story>