5 ms·

> So why does it feel like the world is in decline Because our environment is on the decline. Our oceans are full of plastic, our forests are converted to farm

> So why does it feel like the world is in decline Because our environment is on the decline. Our oceans are full of plastic, our forests are converted to farmland for cattle, pollution from electronics is rising, and our global climate is changing for the worse. Even optimistic areas like health care are being confounded by obesity and malnutrition. It’s great that global health care and poverty rates are improving. But in some of our own countries things are getting worse. There’s a growing income inequality and an obesity epidemic. My generation may be the first in a while to have a lower life expectancy than my parents’. Many of my friends are feeling hopeless because their university degrees are buying them 20 hours a week at minimum wage (which has not adjusted for inflation too well) while the cost of housing sky rockets.

faitswulff 9y ago
Health care is also confounded by climate change and global warming as flu season strikes earlier and more viciously: https://globalbiodefense.com/2013/01/31/global-warming-and-the-effect-on-seasonal-influenza/ https://globalbiodefense.com/2013/01/31/global-warming-and-t... Just like starfish are being laid low by a virus normally kept at bay by lower ocean temperatures (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/scientists-now-link-massive-starfish-die-off-warming-ocean/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/scient...), I expect there to be higher rates of unexpected disease in human populations as well.
vinhboy 9y ago
----------
- krapp 9y ago
  No, less than a third of eligible voters voted for the racist con-man. The majority of Americans voted against him or not at all. Not that that actually matters.
- GuiA 9y ago
  Trump got 62,979,636 votes. That's 46% of voters, but 24% of the population eligible to vote (and 20% of the total population).
johnwheeler 9y ago
Yet, you write this on a Computer, which wouldnt be possible without those fossil fuels that pushed us through the industrial revolution and onto the technical revolution and gave us those plastics. I think it’s crazy to assume we won’t find answers to the problems you bring up and take a sky is falling attitude when you look at the track record of human progress. Even though your friends are struggling to find jobs, they’re likely living better than John D. Rockefeller did. Doesn’t excuse the problem, but don’t take these things for granted.
- tomhoward 9y ago
  they’re likely living better than John D. Rockefeller did This may be true in material terms but it assumes that material wellbeing is all that counts. The reason this comment triggered such a strong reaction is that it dismisses the emotional distress that goes along with being at the bottom of the socioeconomic pile. Factors like student debt, medical costs and the general costs of living in many places put many people into profound distress, that can turn into unbearable chronic misery, for which air conditioning seems like small consolation. I agree with your overall point, and I am one of those that is able to take an optimistic view of the future and trust that problems that seem like existential threats now can be resolved in time. But I'd urge you to be sensitive enough to anticipate the kinds of reactions you'll trigger when you make a claim like this, even if it's true by the narrow definition you've chosen.
  - johnwheeler 9y ago
    Sure, I can appreciate how insensitive that sounded. It was a bad way to come off and that truly wasn’t my intention.
- dang 9y ago
  Many of your comments in this thread have broken the HN guidelines by being flamebait or outright flamewar. It's one thing to express a considered point of view and another to get into ideological mud wrestling. Please don't post like this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: it looks from your recent history like you've primarily been using HN for ideological battle. That destroys what this site is supposed to be for, so we ban accounts that do it. Please don't do it. That is also in the site guidelines.
trevyn 9y ago
You sound unhappy, which is confusing to me, because you just listed a bunch of great challenges to work on. Working on challenges tends to remove feelings of hopelessness.
- chickenfries 9y ago
  Would you say this to someone who told you they had cancer? Or lost their job? “I‘m surprised your not happy about hardship?” Do you actually look at something like obesity, or addiction and say “ah, what a great PROBLEM to work on.”
skybrian 9y ago
On the other hand, by most measures, pollution in the US hit a low in the 60's and has greatly improved since then. It's even improved quite a bit since 1990 [1]. Even CO2 emissions are on the decline since 2008. (Not nearly enough, but still.) In the Eastern US the low point for forest cover was in 1872 [2]. In the western US a major problem is too much ground cover resulting in worse forest fires. (Which is not to say that forests are healthy - the pine beetle epidemic is devastating.) I'm not going to say things are great, but whether they're better or worse depends on where you look and what you compare against. [1] https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2017/#air_pollution https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2017/#air_pollution [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_...

faitswulff 9y ago

Health care is also confounded by climate change and global warming as flu season strikes earlier and more viciously: https://globalbiodefense.com/2013/01/31/global-warming-and-the-effect-on-seasonal-influenza/ https://globalbiodefense.com/2013/01/31/global-warming-and-t... Just like starfish are being laid low by a virus normally kept at bay by lower ocean temperatures (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/scientists-now-link-massive-starfish-die-off-warming-ocean/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/scient...), I expect there to be higher rates of unexpected disease in human populations as well.

vinhboy 9y ago

----------

krapp 9y ago
No, less than a third of eligible voters voted for the racist con-man. The majority of Americans voted against him or not at all. Not that that actually matters.
GuiA 9y ago
Trump got 62,979,636 votes. That's 46% of voters, but 24% of the population eligible to vote (and 20% of the total population).

johnwheeler 9y ago

Yet, you write this on a Computer, which wouldnt be possible without those fossil fuels that pushed us through the industrial revolution and onto the technical revolution and gave us those plastics. I think it’s crazy to assume we won’t find answers to the problems you bring up and take a sky is falling attitude when you look at the track record of human progress. Even though your friends are struggling to find jobs, they’re likely living better than John D. Rockefeller did. Doesn’t excuse the problem, but don’t take these things for granted.

tomhoward 9y ago
they’re likely living better than John D. Rockefeller did This may be true in material terms but it assumes that material wellbeing is all that counts. The reason this comment triggered such a strong reaction is that it dismisses the emotional distress that goes along with being at the bottom of the socioeconomic pile. Factors like student debt, medical costs and the general costs of living in many places put many people into profound distress, that can turn into unbearable chronic misery, for which air conditioning seems like small consolation. I agree with your overall point, and I am one of those that is able to take an optimistic view of the future and trust that problems that seem like existential threats now can be resolved in time. But I'd urge you to be sensitive enough to anticipate the kinds of reactions you'll trigger when you make a claim like this, even if it's true by the narrow definition you've chosen.
- johnwheeler 9y ago
  Sure, I can appreciate how insensitive that sounded. It was a bad way to come off and that truly wasn’t my intention.
dang 9y ago
Many of your comments in this thread have broken the HN guidelines by being flamebait or outright flamewar. It's one thing to express a considered point of view and another to get into ideological mud wrestling. Please don't post like this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: it looks from your recent history like you've primarily been using HN for ideological battle. That destroys what this site is supposed to be for, so we ban accounts that do it. Please don't do it. That is also in the site guidelines.

trevyn 9y ago

You sound unhappy, which is confusing to me, because you just listed a bunch of great challenges to work on. Working on challenges tends to remove feelings of hopelessness.

chickenfries 9y ago
Would you say this to someone who told you they had cancer? Or lost their job? “I‘m surprised your not happy about hardship?” Do you actually look at something like obesity, or addiction and say “ah, what a great PROBLEM to work on.”

skybrian 9y ago

On the other hand, by most measures, pollution in the US hit a low in the 60's and has greatly improved since then. It's even improved quite a bit since 1990 [1]. Even CO2 emissions are on the decline since 2008. (Not nearly enough, but still.) In the Eastern US the low point for forest cover was in 1872 [2]. In the western US a major problem is too much ground cover resulting in worse forest fires. (Which is not to say that forests are healthy - the pine beetle epidemic is devastating.) I'm not going to say things are great, but whether they're better or worse depends on where you look and what you compare against. [1] https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2017/#air_pollution https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2017/#air_pollution [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_...