5 ms·

It shouldn't be a zero-sum game where you have to choose between starvation and air pollution. The west did not go about industrial development in an environmen

by smb06 10y ago

It shouldn't be a zero-sum game where you have to choose between starvation and air pollution. The west did not go about industrial development in an environmentally friendly way and that only increases the onus on the developing countries to learn from their mistakes, instead of repeating them.

eyelidlessness 10y ago
The west hasn't ceased industrial development, and we'd be remiss to pretend that we have. The fact that we've outsourced a lot of the costs to China and then to other countries doesn't change the fact that we extract growth from dumping toxins and pollutants into the environment. If we want to preach learning from mistakes, we should take our privileged position and lead the charge. We do the opposite of that, externalizing the costs of ongoing industrialization to societies that can least afford the costs. The ultimate math is a zero-sum game. Industrialization produces efficiency and waste, and a lot of the meaningful waste comes in the form of harm to our future environment. We haven't actually devised a way to produce industrial goods without producing massive byproducts that harm people somewhere. Until we have, the best course of action we can take is to reduce consumption. But so far we've done the opposite.
- zhte415 10y ago
  > The ultimate math is a zero-sum game. It is most definitely not a zero sum game so far, but there certainly are losers.
- moultano 10y ago
  >externalizing the costs of ongoing industrialization to societies that can least afford the costs. We regulate pollution, China mostly doesn't. It's not clear to me what policy you think the West should adopt to fix this.
  - vkou 10y ago
    Tax imports of products that pollute as part of their manufacturing process. There, this both evens the paying field, creates an incentive for everyone to play ball, and promotes non-polluting economic growth.
    - moultano 10y ago
      That's reasonable, but hard to enact without inviting retaliation. I'm not sure if the resulting retaliation would make the overall policy a net win or loss.

by smb06 10y ago

eyelidlessness 10y ago

The west hasn't ceased industrial development, and we'd be remiss to pretend that we have. The fact that we've outsourced a lot of the costs to China and then to other countries doesn't change the fact that we extract growth from dumping toxins and pollutants into the environment. If we want to preach learning from mistakes, we should take our privileged position and lead the charge. We do the opposite of that, externalizing the costs of ongoing industrialization to societies that can least afford the costs. The ultimate math is a zero-sum game. Industrialization produces efficiency and waste, and a lot of the meaningful waste comes in the form of harm to our future environment. We haven't actually devised a way to produce industrial goods without producing massive byproducts that harm people somewhere. Until we have, the best course of action we can take is to reduce consumption. But so far we've done the opposite.

zhte415 10y ago
> The ultimate math is a zero-sum game. It is most definitely not a zero sum game so far, but there certainly are losers.
moultano 10y ago
>externalizing the costs of ongoing industrialization to societies that can least afford the costs. We regulate pollution, China mostly doesn't. It's not clear to me what policy you think the West should adopt to fix this.
- vkou 10y ago
  Tax imports of products that pollute as part of their manufacturing process. There, this both evens the paying field, creates an incentive for everyone to play ball, and promotes non-polluting economic growth.
  - moultano 10y ago
    That's reasonable, but hard to enact without inviting retaliation. I'm not sure if the resulting retaliation would make the overall policy a net win or loss.