To me, the problem with “1.5 degC” messaging as it is treated as a boundary “avoid this or doom”, where “avoid” immediately means decades of economic disadvantage compared countries that ignore the warning.

Rarely, does the messaging talk about actual long-term harms in the form of economic costs with numbers. And if they do, it’s worse than convincing people to be concerned about the extended weather forecast for next month…

It’s really a trade-off that should be discussed with less emotion and more reason. Unfortunately, it involves a timescale that is beyond that of political terms, and remaining lifetimes of elected officials…