So what now? Is it best to reconsider the path that we are taking around taxing carbon footprints and greenhouse gases? How do we accurately measure just how much of a difference our efforts will make? Is this urgency really needed for poorer countries who must take on the financial burden? This article talks about how the "Poorest areas and those least responsible for climate change will take the “biggest monetary hit”, according to a new study by researchers at Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research"

this was very interesting for me; you would think that the efforts should be equal to the results but I dismissed the loopholes around pollution laws. The author states that there must be consistent political laws surrounding operations in order for this to work. Even a slight relaxation will result in steps backward.

this was an epiphany for me. I was very much pro pollution taxation in order to help the environment; however, through this lens it makes me question whether we are trying to do too much. Is the preventative cost we are incurring equal to the true estimated damages?

"For example, can simplifying the enrollment process for fi nancial aid increase participation?"

This question made me connect to previous research that I did about administrative burdens in the American Welfare system and the idea of the "undeserving poor". I am wondering whether this idea is prevalent in Asian countries and if the government has considered or implemented easier burdens to accessing aid and welfare to end the poverty cycle.

The image of someone having three different windows that each portray a misleading landscape made me reconsider the different conditions that one is put under and how it could influence decisions. I see it being that if you see the bright greenery versus the image of the broken fire hydrant, it would create vastly contrasting mental modes that would contribute to your thinking.

"This Report shows that a more interdisciplinary perspective on human behavior can improve the predictive power of economics and provide new tools for development policy."

I think the author is trying to convey that for a long time economics and decision making revolving human behaviour looked solely on only a single or couple factors. However, it should actually be researched more holistically due to the complex nature of how people think under different environments. This leads us to look at the question through various perspectives instead of just one.