4 ms·

Makes sense: when a country has an industrial revolution it just wants to grow fast. Then when the extreme growth part passes it starts to stabilize: this is w

Makes sense: when a country has an industrial revolution it just wants to grow fast. Then when the extreme growth part passes it starts to stabilize: this is when the country & the people start doing well enough so that they can look at other issues (environmental impact) without having to sacrifice their livelihoods. The human will always prioritize his own and his families livelihood. Only once that is stable can one afford to look at the impact. If you're poor and can hardly afford basic stuff for your children you obviously won't care about the environment, it's last thing on your mind. And if anyone writes "yeah but even poor people should care": no, that is not how human nature works. First you & your family, only then everything else.

justicezyx 7y ago
> that is not how human nature works. Please add should, this should not be how human nature works. Also, one capitalist cannot on the one hand free will is the key for prosperity, and at he same time ask others to think beyond others’ basic life needs while suffering.
marmaduke 7y ago
This is exactly what I think of when I see hopefuls talking about climate change, among other topics. The guy who doesn't have enough money for rent? He's not buying the expensive free range eggs. If I were in a developing country, I would be worried that climate accords become a other way for those on top to stay there.
- vinay427 7y ago
  > The guy who doesn't have enough money for rent? He's not buying the expensive free range eggs. I suppose you were just providing a random example, but if you're curious the production of free-range eggs almost certainly pollutes more carbon than caged eggs [1] while being less ethically sound (assuming that was the consideration for cage-free), environmentally responsible, and typically more expensive than plant alternatives. [1] https://www.smh.com.au/national/free-range-hens-boost-carbon-20-percent-20111216-1oyvp.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/free-range-hens-boost-carbon...
  - jschwartzi 7y ago
    That's okay, because I use about 50% fewer eggs when I buy free range. They're more than twice as expensive. So while the per-egg carbon cost is 20% higher my total carbon usage for eggs will have dropped significantly as a result of switching.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    What's the ethical concern of free-range? Also, the report you cited was the (conventional) egg industry researching itself, not an independent study.
- addicted 7y ago
  Except that's a false dichotomy. The hypothetical guy you're talking about is almost certainly the one whose family is gonna be negatively affected the most by climate change. And this isn't in some hypothetical future. It's already happening.

justicezyx 7y ago

> that is not how human nature works. Please add should, this should not be how human nature works. Also, one capitalist cannot on the one hand free will is the key for prosperity, and at he same time ask others to think beyond others’ basic life needs while suffering.

marmaduke 7y ago

This is exactly what I think of when I see hopefuls talking about climate change, among other topics. The guy who doesn't have enough money for rent? He's not buying the expensive free range eggs. If I were in a developing country, I would be worried that climate accords become a other way for those on top to stay there.

vinay427 7y ago
> The guy who doesn't have enough money for rent? He's not buying the expensive free range eggs. I suppose you were just providing a random example, but if you're curious the production of free-range eggs almost certainly pollutes more carbon than caged eggs [1] while being less ethically sound (assuming that was the consideration for cage-free), environmentally responsible, and typically more expensive than plant alternatives. [1] https://www.smh.com.au/national/free-range-hens-boost-carbon-20-percent-20111216-1oyvp.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/free-range-hens-boost-carbon...
- jschwartzi 7y ago
  That's okay, because I use about 50% fewer eggs when I buy free range. They're more than twice as expensive. So while the per-egg carbon cost is 20% higher my total carbon usage for eggs will have dropped significantly as a result of switching.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  What's the ethical concern of free-range? Also, the report you cited was the (conventional) egg industry researching itself, not an independent study.
addicted 7y ago
Except that's a false dichotomy. The hypothetical guy you're talking about is almost certainly the one whose family is gonna be negatively affected the most by climate change. And this isn't in some hypothetical future. It's already happening.