4 ms·

Horseshit. Given the exponential nature of technological progress I’m almost certain we will see a technological solution to global warming in my lifetime. Fusi

Horseshit. Given the exponential nature of technological progress I’m almost certain we will see a technological solution to global warming in my lifetime. Fusion powered carbon capture or reflective stuff in the upper atmosphere etc. Who knows what form it will take. But nobody will just sit idle and watch billions of people die. The major flaw of the current suggestions is that they either aren’t affordable, or lower the standard of living, or both. Outside the 1% bubble it’s been less than 100 years since people had a decent standard of living to begin with, so quite understandably they prefer to drive huge trucks, buy large houses, and fly to Hawaii every year. Shit if it’s ok for Al Gore and Leo DiCaprio to fly private to climate change summits, surely the hoi polloi can partake as well.

tallanvor 8y ago
And yet we sit by while at least 9 million people die from hunger every year ( https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/quick-facts-what-you-need-know-about-global-hunger https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/quick-facts-what-you-nee... ), and some groups estimate the number is much higher. People can, unfortunately, easily ignore problems that aren't right at their door, and most of the people who are affected the most aren't in North America or Europe.
- throwaway84742 8y ago
  Bzzzt, wrong answer. A lot fewer people die from hunger now than even a decade ago. And the number is much less than that overall. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition
  - tallanvor 8y ago
    First, please be polite. Second, the Wikipedia article you link to doesn't provide clear information. The number my source cited was from 2016, which is still quite recent. If we're down from 36 million in 2006, that's good news, but it still means that millions still die every year due to starvation and malnutrition.
    - throwaway84742 8y ago
      Where was I not polite? The figures you quote are cooked. While it is true that malnutrition is the _indirect_ cause of the majority of those deaths, most people counted do not really die from malnutrition per se, but from a combination of malnutrition and infectious disease. Both malnutrition and lack of vaccination are being addressed, and the rate of death is dropping like a rock as a result. Maybe not as quickly as one would like, but it’s just disingenuous to say that nothing is being done or people are “ignoring” anything about this.
- TangoTrotFox 8y ago
  That number is probably grossly inflated. This [1] article on famine indicates about 75,000 people die per year due to famine or the lack of food. That's down from 928,000 a year from the 19th century (now consider that in percent populations!). You can attribute many things to hunger when the causes are not necessarily primarily hunger. But for the sake of argument. Let's imagine that number was true. The stupefying thing is even that number is surprisingly positive. There are currently 7.6 billion people in the world. Numbers like this are really hard to wrap your head around, but to put that another way that means that, even if we pretend that number is real, that means that 99.9% of this world have enough food to get by. Think about all of the countries doing completely idiotic things and all the warfare going on which tends to cause starvation. In spite of all that 99.9% of people have enough to get by? That is really quite remarkable! And as mentioned the big problem here is not a lack of money or a lack of arable land or anything like that. It tends to be because of bad decisions. Zimbabwe, the former 'breadbasket of Africa' is the poster child here. They chose to forcibly confiscate the land of experienced farmers (without compensation) because of their skin color, and then redistribute it to people with minimal farming experience. Around the same time they also decided to try to become socialist ruining the extrinsic (financial) motivation to maximize production. You'll never guess what happened next! So what do you want to do there? You're not going to solve that country's issues by donating to a charity or even pursuing greater foreign aid. They need to either solve their own issues (which they do seem to be making progress towards - having recently staged an armed coup) or you're left to start another war for some good old fashioned 'regime change' in which case we often end up screwing things up even worse in the longrun, if not in the shortrun, as war and hunger tend to go together. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine#21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine#21st_century

tallanvor 8y ago

And yet we sit by while at least 9 million people die from hunger every year ( https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/quick-facts-what-you-need-know-about-global-hunger https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/quick-facts-what-you-nee... ), and some groups estimate the number is much higher. People can, unfortunately, easily ignore problems that aren't right at their door, and most of the people who are affected the most aren't in North America or Europe.

throwaway84742 8y ago
Bzzzt, wrong answer. A lot fewer people die from hunger now than even a decade ago. And the number is much less than that overall. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malnutrition
- tallanvor 8y ago
  First, please be polite. Second, the Wikipedia article you link to doesn't provide clear information. The number my source cited was from 2016, which is still quite recent. If we're down from 36 million in 2006, that's good news, but it still means that millions still die every year due to starvation and malnutrition.
  - throwaway84742 8y ago
    Where was I not polite? The figures you quote are cooked. While it is true that malnutrition is the _indirect_ cause of the majority of those deaths, most people counted do not really die from malnutrition per se, but from a combination of malnutrition and infectious disease. Both malnutrition and lack of vaccination are being addressed, and the rate of death is dropping like a rock as a result. Maybe not as quickly as one would like, but it’s just disingenuous to say that nothing is being done or people are “ignoring” anything about this.
TangoTrotFox 8y ago
That number is probably grossly inflated. This [1] article on famine indicates about 75,000 people die per year due to famine or the lack of food. That's down from 928,000 a year from the 19th century (now consider that in percent populations!). You can attribute many things to hunger when the causes are not necessarily primarily hunger. But for the sake of argument. Let's imagine that number was true. The stupefying thing is even that number is surprisingly positive. There are currently 7.6 billion people in the world. Numbers like this are really hard to wrap your head around, but to put that another way that means that, even if we pretend that number is real, that means that 99.9% of this world have enough food to get by. Think about all of the countries doing completely idiotic things and all the warfare going on which tends to cause starvation. In spite of all that 99.9% of people have enough to get by? That is really quite remarkable! And as mentioned the big problem here is not a lack of money or a lack of arable land or anything like that. It tends to be because of bad decisions. Zimbabwe, the former 'breadbasket of Africa' is the poster child here. They chose to forcibly confiscate the land of experienced farmers (without compensation) because of their skin color, and then redistribute it to people with minimal farming experience. Around the same time they also decided to try to become socialist ruining the extrinsic (financial) motivation to maximize production. You'll never guess what happened next! So what do you want to do there? You're not going to solve that country's issues by donating to a charity or even pursuing greater foreign aid. They need to either solve their own issues (which they do seem to be making progress towards - having recently staged an armed coup) or you're left to start another war for some good old fashioned 'regime change' in which case we often end up screwing things up even worse in the longrun, if not in the shortrun, as war and hunger tend to go together. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine#21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine#21st_century