4 ms·

That's not the problem. They have the right to. We encourage it. But there are too many humans. This is just a hisper example, but pollution, food quality, dem

That's not the problem. They have the right to. We encourage it. But there are too many humans. This is just a hisper example, but pollution, food quality, democraty, education and the health system suffer from the same problem. It's going to get worse and all we do is finding temporary solutions, not adressing the elephant in the room: promoting growth forever is not sustainable. I really lile this conf: https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=SP6A1FD147A45EF50D&playnext=1&v=F-QA2rkpBSY&feature=list_other https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=SP6A1FD147A45EF50D&playnext... Because it addresses the problem mathematically, and answers the usual rebukes about innovation, moderation and other "sustainable growth".

newswriter99 7y ago
That's my point. From my perspective, the headline isn't: "There are too many humans" Instead it's: "It was better when only us privileged humans got to do this thing"
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  There is nothing wrong with that inconvenient truth. Finite systems don’t care about political correctness. Perhaps a better headline would’ve been, “Not everyone can join the middle class”.
  - sametmax 7y ago
    That would make it subject to outcry because it could be understood as "you are not allowed", while the problem is that "there are too many of us for this lifestyle"
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >There is nothing wrong with that inconvenient truth. Finite systems don’t care about political correctness. Some care is needed though, because neither the poor butchering the rich classes with machetes during a revolt care about political correctness either... >Perhaps a better headline would’ve been, “Not everyone can join the middle class”. How about, "less tourism, whether upper or middle class"? I'd like to see wannabe tourists earn the right to travel, as opposed to it being the default or just what money buy you. Maybe a cultural exam based on the destination? Make people work for it. Of course that's not in the interest of huge tourism industries, domestic or abroad. People that travel just to drink cheep beer or expensive champagne in another country, could always just stay at home and drink there.
    - sametmax 7y ago
      > How about, "less tourism, whether upper or middle class"? That won't work on the long run. Watch the video, it is addressed.
melling 7y ago
I’m sure we can handle more people on this planet if we don’t all eat meat daily, we don’t need to drive cars, and don’t get on airplanes to travel 200-500 miles. How much wasted space do we have in cities because we build around cars? https://www.fastcompany.com/90202222/heres-how-much-space-u-s-cities-waste-on-parking https://www.fastcompany.com/90202222/heres-how-much-space-u-...
- sametmax 7y ago
  Watch the video. This is addressed as well. There are many variables to this: the time we get to react, the effect on democracy, the innovation fallacy, our perspective on resources availability, etc.
throwaway50003 7y ago
We are a reaaally far cry from exhausting all our resources. Overpopulation is a concern but all trends point at a curb of growth in the 2050's. The problem isn't that we collectively consume too much, it's that some consume waaaaay too much and others fight for crumbs and get told off when they dare yearn for more. Guilt-tripping middle-class and poor people into accepting lower standards of living is dangerous imo, because silly contributions you may make are dwarfed by corporate contributions. Studies show that people who do token actions such as eating less meat are less likely to take part in actions that matter e.g. dismantling Exxon and putting its top execs behind bars).
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  Forecast is a 60% increase of the world population by the end of the century... The future of climate change and the environment is hopeless because of that as we already don't do anything now. I don't know who's childishly downvoting any comment that points this out. I can only suggest that they wake up and smell the coffee.
- sametmax 7y ago
  This is addressed in the video I linked as well. Watch it, your point is logical but doesn't take in consideration several variables.

newswriter99 7y ago

That's my point. From my perspective, the headline isn't: "There are too many humans" Instead it's: "It was better when only us privileged humans got to do this thing"

toomuchtodo 7y ago
There is nothing wrong with that inconvenient truth. Finite systems don’t care about political correctness. Perhaps a better headline would’ve been, “Not everyone can join the middle class”.
- sametmax 7y ago
  That would make it subject to outcry because it could be understood as "you are not allowed", while the problem is that "there are too many of us for this lifestyle"
- coldtea 7y ago
  >There is nothing wrong with that inconvenient truth. Finite systems don’t care about political correctness. Some care is needed though, because neither the poor butchering the rich classes with machetes during a revolt care about political correctness either... >Perhaps a better headline would’ve been, “Not everyone can join the middle class”. How about, "less tourism, whether upper or middle class"? I'd like to see wannabe tourists earn the right to travel, as opposed to it being the default or just what money buy you. Maybe a cultural exam based on the destination? Make people work for it. Of course that's not in the interest of huge tourism industries, domestic or abroad. People that travel just to drink cheep beer or expensive champagne in another country, could always just stay at home and drink there.
  - sametmax 7y ago
    > How about, "less tourism, whether upper or middle class"? That won't work on the long run. Watch the video, it is addressed.

melling 7y ago

I’m sure we can handle more people on this planet if we don’t all eat meat daily, we don’t need to drive cars, and don’t get on airplanes to travel 200-500 miles. How much wasted space do we have in cities because we build around cars? https://www.fastcompany.com/90202222/heres-how-much-space-u-s-cities-waste-on-parking https://www.fastcompany.com/90202222/heres-how-much-space-u-...

sametmax 7y ago
Watch the video. This is addressed as well. There are many variables to this: the time we get to react, the effect on democracy, the innovation fallacy, our perspective on resources availability, etc.

throwaway50003 7y ago

We are a reaaally far cry from exhausting all our resources. Overpopulation is a concern but all trends point at a curb of growth in the 2050's. The problem isn't that we collectively consume too much, it's that some consume waaaaay too much and others fight for crumbs and get told off when they dare yearn for more. Guilt-tripping middle-class and poor people into accepting lower standards of living is dangerous imo, because silly contributions you may make are dwarfed by corporate contributions. Studies show that people who do token actions such as eating less meat are less likely to take part in actions that matter e.g. dismantling Exxon and putting its top execs behind bars).

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
Forecast is a 60% increase of the world population by the end of the century... The future of climate change and the environment is hopeless because of that as we already don't do anything now. I don't know who's childishly downvoting any comment that points this out. I can only suggest that they wake up and smell the coffee.
sametmax 7y ago
This is addressed in the video I linked as well. Watch it, your point is logical but doesn't take in consideration several variables.