3 ms·

"Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? there're studies (e.g. this report from citybank[0]) that shows that inaction is actually more expensive, taking

"Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? there're studies (e.g. this report from citybank[0]) that shows that inaction is actually more expensive, taking into account the cost of the climate change disasters... Seems to me that people believe that doing nothing we will keep living in the same way. Sorry to have to wake you up. Doing nothing will screw up the planet and your (and mine) "lifestyle". The article referenced in this discussion[1] have other nice data/information about this topic. I have kids and this is not the future I want for them. [0] https://ir.citi.com/hsq32Jl1m4aIzicMqH8sBkPnbsqfnwy4Jgb1J2kIPYWIw5eM8yD3FY9VbGpK%2Baax https://ir.citi.com/hsq32Jl1m4aIzicMqH8sBkPnbsqfnwy4Jgb1J2kI... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10622615 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10622615

pif 10y ago
> "Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? there're studies (that shows that inaction is actually more expensive Please, keep in mind that renouncing to your car will not prevent you from breathing smoke, unless many people around you do the same. Reducing to the bare minimum your electricity consumption will not lower the slice of your taxes devoted to dealing with global warming, unless many people around you do the same. Et cetera...
antisthenes 10y ago
> "Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? > I have kids and this is not the future I want for them. Why did you choose to have kids? Was not having kids an acceptable lifestyle cost for you in order to save the planet ?
- danieltillett 10y ago
  Unfortunately unless everyone stops having kids it is not going to help. I would argue that what the world needs is more thoughtful people and that thoughtful people should be having more children.
  - pietrofmaggi 10y ago
    Well, if everybody stops having kids (everybody), saving the planet will not be a problem for a long time, at least for human kind :-)

pif 10y ago

> "Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? there're studies (that shows that inaction is actually more expensive Please, keep in mind that renouncing to your car will not prevent you from breathing smoke, unless many people around you do the same. Reducing to the bare minimum your electricity consumption will not lower the slice of your taxes devoted to dealing with global warming, unless many people around you do the same. Et cetera...

antisthenes 10y ago

> "Cost in terms of lifestyle" compared to what? > I have kids and this is not the future I want for them. Why did you choose to have kids? Was not having kids an acceptable lifestyle cost for you in order to save the planet ?

danieltillett 10y ago
Unfortunately unless everyone stops having kids it is not going to help. I would argue that what the world needs is more thoughtful people and that thoughtful people should be having more children.
- pietrofmaggi 10y ago
  Well, if everybody stops having kids (everybody), saving the planet will not be a problem for a long time, at least for human kind :-)