You are pointing out an example of "the tragedy of the commons"
Tragedy of the commons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which is an important conundrum in economic/political theory. Yes, one way to enforce compliance with "common good" goals is to for example put a $5/gallon tax on gas which would give us European prices and force everyone except Mitt Romney's wife to drive smaller cars. I don't deny that sort of maneuvering might come to pass here as it has overseas if the political climate changes. So long as we don't just piss the extra revenue away, that might both cut carbon and the deficit although it would clearly penalize suburban and rural families far more than those who live where public transport or smaller cars are already the norm.
So I agree money is not irrelevant. However, what you are saying, smarty pants, is that money trumps science and reality. You'd rather remain dumb on the climate science because you fear where it may lead. You would rather protect your conservative financial views than understand what science tells us about the climate because you fear the consequences of the science driven public policy. That's kinda bass ackards don't you think? Kinda like the Pope in Galileo's time.
I'd say it is most important to get the science right and then debate how best to proceed.
