The Environmental Defense Fund and the Ad Council released an emotionally moving commercial depicting an older man standing on train tracks. After expressing apathy on global warming, he steps off the tracks to reveal a young girl about to be hit by the oncoming train.Some right-wingers spice up arguments for fiscal responsibility with emotional appeals to think of the future generations who will have to pay for our reckless spending.In both the personal and the political, we face tradeoffs between the present and the future. Money saved now will be worth far more in retirement. The pain caused by a carbon tax might prevent larger pains in the future.An assumption is unquestioned: Good, responsible voters should think about the well-being of those in the distant future.I think this assumption is true to some extent, but there are good reasons to care far less about future generations than about our own.1. People don’t really care about future generations.When Ben Franklin died, he left £1,000 each for Philadelphia and Boston to gather interest for 200 years before being donated to charity. By 1990, the funds had grown to $2.3 million and $5 million, respectively.This story is remarkable for its success. In 2010 dollars, the funds were worth about $55,000 each. Through the power of compounding interest, his donation was able to help far more people in the 20th century than it would have in the 18th century.This story is also remarkable for its uniqueness. No one has copied it. Many talk about how much they care about those in the future, but talk is cheap. When it’s time to make serious decisions, almost all choose those they know, even though their money would help far more in the future.Creating legislation that benefits future folk at the expense of modern folk in a world where no one cares about future folk makes about as much sense as supporting art in a world where no one cares about artists.2. Future generations will be far, far richer than us.If the economy grows at only 2.5 percent a year, prosperity will double every 28 years. From 1980-2008, the Chinese economy grew at an average of more than 9 percent yearly.I’m willing to sacrifice to help the starving poor overseas. I’m less willing to sacrifice for well-fed millionaires.If growth rates continue, the distant future will be populated by well-off millionaires. Cap and trade might help keep the sea from rising — but, if future folk can rebuild their cities on higher ground with robot armies, global warming won’t hurt them as much as economic stagnation will hurt me.If we subscribe to the logic of progressive taxation — that the rich should sacrifice more than the poor — than we should feel free to recycle aluminum cans only when the trash can is farther away.3. Apocalypse.There’s a non-zero chance asteroid strikes, alien attacks or supervolcano eruptions will make humanity extinct. To the handful of survivors standing on the smoldering ashes of civilization, spartan tax increases to balance the budget will seem foolish in hindsight.The chance of apocalypse lowers the amount we should care about future folk.If my great-great-grandkids read this column, now you know why I didn’t create any funds for you. Sorry.Now go enjoy your robot version of Elizabeth Banks.Daniel Morgan is a 22-year old economics senior from Baton Rouge. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_dmorgan.—————Contact Daniel Morgan at [email protected]