3 ms·

> I was talking to my dad last night and he was saying how important it is to maximize your 401k, etc. and all I could think was "but even I have money it won't

> I was talking to my dad last night and he was saying how important it is to maximize your 401k, etc. and all I could think was "but even I have money it won't effing mean anything when billions of people are starving and you need to defend any means to produce food with force". The nytimes summary (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/23/climate/us-climate-report.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/23/climate/us-climate-report...) claims the report talks about a 10% hit to US GDP in 2100 (note: I can't actually find such language in the report). If you are in America, that type of hit is hardly on the level of life destroying, though I'll admit a) there's tail-probabilities of much worse happening, b) people in developing countries will be hurt far more, c) if you care about the outdoors, you'll be a lot less happy.

DoctorOetker 8y ago
how can one calculate the 10% hit on GDP for 2100? With rising temperatures, there will be natural selection pressure on all organisms, many on which the economy relies (say plants). Organisms that repeat their lifecycle faster will have advantage over organisms with longer lifecycles (the shorter-lived adversarial species among 2 adversarial species can iterate variations faster sequentially, regardless if the 2 adversarial species are competing or predator-prey, ...). Organisms that have higher population counts will have advantage over organisms with lower population counts (since the species with higher population counts is trying out more variations in parallel) Hence smaller, simpler organisms will cause lots of diseases and afflictions in say agriculture, which probably will adversely affect our economies... A 10% hit on GDP sounds like a ridiculous underestimate
- CalRobert 8y ago
  I worry that current projections seem to disregard problems like the potential clathrate gun. So far we've been forecasting too optimistically. Also, having hundreds of millions of starving people fleeing central and south america may affect stability. In addition to being a profound and completely catastrophe.

DoctorOetker 8y ago

how can one calculate the 10% hit on GDP for 2100? With rising temperatures, there will be natural selection pressure on all organisms, many on which the economy relies (say plants). Organisms that repeat their lifecycle faster will have advantage over organisms with longer lifecycles (the shorter-lived adversarial species among 2 adversarial species can iterate variations faster sequentially, regardless if the 2 adversarial species are competing or predator-prey, ...). Organisms that have higher population counts will have advantage over organisms with lower population counts (since the species with higher population counts is trying out more variations in parallel) Hence smaller, simpler organisms will cause lots of diseases and afflictions in say agriculture, which probably will adversely affect our economies... A 10% hit on GDP sounds like a ridiculous underestimate

CalRobert 8y ago
I worry that current projections seem to disregard problems like the potential clathrate gun. So far we've been forecasting too optimistically. Also, having hundreds of millions of starving people fleeing central and south america may affect stability. In addition to being a profound and completely catastrophe.