Araci there are a lot of negatives in this world as is, those are what you are noticing. Those are all dependent on mathematically negative energy, that is energy extracted from the planet. Economies built on extracted energy necessarily require that money is treated as a kind of weapon, it is never given for nothing in return, it has to be used to impose scarcity, we all have to use the same weaponisation of money to just survive, and yet it is all unsustainable, given it depends completely on energy extracted therefore adding to temperature rise.
Notice all of this is negative. Penalising folk for generating carbon, or using more energy than their quota, is all negative use of money. All of it serves to increase the pressure on, and the load on negative energy. That increased pressure reduces if not completely removes all possibilities that we can or will ever switch to mathematically positive energy, the only one of which is the sun.
To use the energy of the sun at all, we have to start rewarding for it's use, rather than penalising for our use of mathematically negative energy. If we never reward for using mathematically positive energy then we will never actually use it, and so the future will be set, ie, no future. The damage and disaster and actually everything negative happening is all down to the use of negative energy, which we are actually increasing our dependence on by things like carbon taxes, and carbon mitigation, all of that is dependent on profit which again is fully dependent on extracted energy, this is even where the energy of profit comes from, it is more or less stolen from the planet.
But all of this can be turned around very quickly if we just made the one positive move, to monetise the economic product already created from solar, that is to start issuing solar indexed stimulus.
Doing that would instantly empower us to switch emphasis and dependence from mathematically negative energy to mathematically positive energy. This would change our view from a negative picture of the future (no future), to a positive view of the future (infinite possibilities). I know it is going to be a tough one for elites to accept, but they will. Nobody really wants to be king of a dying world, I don't think.
I don't know why I picked your negative story to be the one to respond to, there are more than we can shake a stick at, lots of folk can see the problem but not many can see the solution, which is almost the perfect opposite of the problem, we are talking about the difference between hot and cold, good and bad, positive and negative, up vs down, above vs below, but if you can only see the bad, you can never understand the good, I think.
When I started looking at this energy problem about six years ago, I knew things were going to get wierd, but had no idea I would be sounding more like a religious priest than a technical Systems Engineer, before we are done, but here I am, sounding more religious than technical, yet what I am saying here is absolutely the result of formal systems Engineering Analysis.
We can have an infinitely cool, positive new solar powered future if we want it, or we can carry on spiralling down a negative plughole, shackled with the unsustainability of energy extracted from the planet. To choose positivity, we should demand that the monies representing economic product already created from solar are paid out, as stimulus, unconditionally. This is the only way we can start paying what is an energy debt owed by us to the planet, thus winding the temperature back down.
See technology isn't all bad really, is it?