3 ms·

Yea, you shouldn't deny a reality because you believe in the noble lie. And to be fair, climate change is turned into a crazy red hearing of a political issue.

Yea, you shouldn't deny a reality because you believe in the noble lie. And to be fair, climate change is turned into a crazy red hearing of a political issue. There are lakes of sludge outside factory cities in China, insane amounts of plastic particulates in the oceans, tons and tons of textile waste. There are so many many forms of pollution much worse than CO2, and when you focus on just CO2, you get carbon laws like those enacted in Australia briefly that caused more fuel expenditure in moving ore to China for processing instead of processing it domestically. There needs to be a huge change in consumption. We need cell phones that last 10 years, not 2~3. We need to end the constant replacement cycle. Intel's shareholders should be glad when sales are below projections because the old chips are lasting longer. But this is not how our economy or industry works. It's all based about infinite growth, selling you new things, sending your e-waste to Africa to be harvested by kids and be smeltered in recycling shops without OSHA requirements or respirators, sending textile waste to Africa to be sold (but mostly burned), etc. etc. Until there is a major collapse globally and people recognize the scale of our folly of consumerism and over-consumption, people will not recognize the real changes needed to build a more sustainable world. And reducing overall consumption will also reduce CO2 emissions ... along with all types of other emissions. But it will take reduction. We cannot spend and buy our way out of environmental damage.

aaron-santos 7y ago
> people will not recognize the real changes needed to build a more sustainable world I'm a bit more pessimistic. Consumerism and over-consumption is an open-eyed march toward doom. Educating (even by collapse) doesn't change the failure to coordinate. When the incentives are structured to trade values for temporary rosperity "The process continues until all other values that can be traded off have been – in other words, until human ingenuity cannot possibly figure out a way to make things any worse." [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
journalctl 7y ago
Localized pollution and climate change are different issues. Both are bad, but you can’t equate “lakes of sludge outside factory cities in China” and the dramatic changes expected if the models are correct. Whataboutism isn’t helpful here (or anywhere, really). Climate change IS an issue, and it’s only going to get worse. Ten-year cell phones won’t make a lick of difference if we continue burning fossil fuels, and lakes of sludge will seem like Club Med in comparison to rising global temperatures.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
shredprez 7y ago
> the scale of our folly of consumerism and over-consumption Consumerism, over-consumption, and the economic growth these behaviors drive are impossible to eliminate without crippling the global economy. But I think there actually is a way to have our unlimited cake without toasting the planet, it just requires us to divorce the concept of value from physical items (or increase the fidelity, and thus value, of digital items). This is already taking place, with the data economy being the obvious if controversial first step. Similarly, I see the explosion of digital marketplaces and microtransactions within social and mobile gaming platforms as another example of this concept. There will inevitably be externalities to a shift toward primarily virtual consumption, but I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine compelling virtual products diminishing the draw of many physical item, along with the need for infrastructure to support their production and dissemination.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  > Consumerism, over-consumption, and the economic growth these behaviors drive are impossible to eliminate without crippling the global economy. Then let's ask the question. What are the medium (5-20) years and long (100 years) consequences of such crippling in your view? I am not an economist so any insight from an expert would be good.
  - shredprez 7y ago
    Near term, the radical contraction or failure of most businesses that directly or indirectly depend on consumerism and over-consumption as the prevailing social behavior. In America, that's a lot of businesses. In China, that's a lot of businesses. And much of the world effectively serves consumerism in these large nations. Long term... depends? Maybe people figure out a different mechanic to drive growth and re-orient. Maybe people abandon growth as a goal and shift toward a steady-state model (this would be interesting, but would have big global power implications unless every nation signs on). Maybe people suffer for a bit before rediscovering how powerful consumerism is as an economic engine and get back into it for a while until the costs start catching up to them again. As the foremost expert on "my view", you can depend on these predictions to capture with total accuracy what I believe to be the crippling consequences mentioned earlier.
dibujante 7y ago
> There are so many many forms of pollution much worse than CO2 CO2 will end life much faster than any of the other undesirable things you mentioned. It's objectively more dangerous.

aaron-santos 7y ago

> people will not recognize the real changes needed to build a more sustainable world I'm a bit more pessimistic. Consumerism and over-consumption is an open-eyed march toward doom. Educating (even by collapse) doesn't change the failure to coordinate. When the incentives are structured to trade values for temporary rosperity "The process continues until all other values that can be traded off have been – in other words, until human ingenuity cannot possibly figure out a way to make things any worse." [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

journalctl 7y ago

Localized pollution and climate change are different issues. Both are bad, but you can’t equate “lakes of sludge outside factory cities in China” and the dramatic changes expected if the models are correct. Whataboutism isn’t helpful here (or anywhere, really). Climate change IS an issue, and it’s only going to get worse. Ten-year cell phones won’t make a lick of difference if we continue burning fossil fuels, and lakes of sludge will seem like Club Med in comparison to rising global temperatures.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

shredprez 7y ago

> the scale of our folly of consumerism and over-consumption Consumerism, over-consumption, and the economic growth these behaviors drive are impossible to eliminate without crippling the global economy. But I think there actually is a way to have our unlimited cake without toasting the planet, it just requires us to divorce the concept of value from physical items (or increase the fidelity, and thus value, of digital items). This is already taking place, with the data economy being the obvious if controversial first step. Similarly, I see the explosion of digital marketplaces and microtransactions within social and mobile gaming platforms as another example of this concept. There will inevitably be externalities to a shift toward primarily virtual consumption, but I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine compelling virtual products diminishing the draw of many physical item, along with the need for infrastructure to support their production and dissemination.

tempguy9999 7y ago
> Consumerism, over-consumption, and the economic growth these behaviors drive are impossible to eliminate without crippling the global economy. Then let's ask the question. What are the medium (5-20) years and long (100 years) consequences of such crippling in your view? I am not an economist so any insight from an expert would be good.
- shredprez 7y ago
  Near term, the radical contraction or failure of most businesses that directly or indirectly depend on consumerism and over-consumption as the prevailing social behavior. In America, that's a lot of businesses. In China, that's a lot of businesses. And much of the world effectively serves consumerism in these large nations. Long term... depends? Maybe people figure out a different mechanic to drive growth and re-orient. Maybe people abandon growth as a goal and shift toward a steady-state model (this would be interesting, but would have big global power implications unless every nation signs on). Maybe people suffer for a bit before rediscovering how powerful consumerism is as an economic engine and get back into it for a while until the costs start catching up to them again. As the foremost expert on "my view", you can depend on these predictions to capture with total accuracy what I believe to be the crippling consequences mentioned earlier.

dibujante 7y ago

> There are so many many forms of pollution much worse than CO2 CO2 will end life much faster than any of the other undesirable things you mentioned. It's objectively more dangerous.