3 ms·

Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people, and more specifically having too many people living unsust

Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people, and more specifically having too many people living unsustainable lifestyles. Worse, a large percentage of the world's population is now moving out of sustainable living into unsustainable living as a result of globalization (as people gain more wealth, they tend to want things like more meat and driving a car). The net result is that a decreasing population is a good thing for the planet, but a bad thing for economics.

tuatoru 6y ago
> Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people Not exactly. The bottom 85% (in income terms) of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability. There are too many people in OECD countries, perhaps.
- mac01021 6y ago
  > The bottom 85% (in income terms) of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability. Is that true? What percent do they contribute?
  - jordanbeiber 6y ago
    This should give you a rough idea. https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days/ https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days... > Not all countries will have an overshoot day. By way of the country overshoot equation above, a country will only have an overshoot day if their Ecological Footprint per person is greater than global biocapacity per person (1.63 gha). There’s a lot of countries not listed, i.e they do not overshoot.
    - mac01021 6y ago
      I'm still wrapping my head around the meaning of those overshoot days. A person's ecological footprint is a multifaceted thing for which I think a single number cannot necessarily provide a very meaningful summary. But here's some other data, that considers only CO2 emissions: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emi... It groups by country rather than income level but, reading between the lines, it seems to me almost certain that the bottom 85% (in income) of people emit more than half of the global total. BTW it is important to consider that a large fraction of the emissions from countries like China and India are in the service of consumption in wealthy western countries. But, I googled, and even in a famously export-heavy country like China, exports only account for 17% of the GDP.
- newyankee 6y ago
  That is also partly because bottom 50% don't have decent lifestyles. Try commuting for 1.5 hrs in packed local trains in Mumbai and you will definitely wish for a slightly higher carbon footprint in exchange for a better quality of life. Off course, USA standards is unsustainable for the world, but at the least Japanese standards of living are like human rights.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  The bottom 85% of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability, TODAY. They are going to dominate unsustainability in the next few decades. More coal fired power plants were built in Africa in the last decade than all other continents combined.
nopinsight 6y ago
The rapid and massive increase in the number of global middle class is why virtual everything will be important for the planet. If virtual services and experiences become almost as useful and enjoyable as the real world, people will burn less fuel and cause less negative externalities. (They could be better as well! Even those who enjoy traveling, for example, don’t care for the hassles of airport queuing, getting stuck in sardine-like plane seats, finding laundry places, etc.) Obviously, real-world experiences necessary for genuine, long-term human connections should remain. Note: Although the birth rate is falling, the number of global middle class is expected to rise a great deal in the next few decades, largely due to rapid economic development.

tuatoru 6y ago

> Counterpoint: major world problems like climate change are a direct result of having too many people Not exactly. The bottom 85% (in income terms) of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability. There are too many people in OECD countries, perhaps.

mac01021 6y ago
> The bottom 85% (in income terms) of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability. Is that true? What percent do they contribute?
- jordanbeiber 6y ago
  This should give you a rough idea. https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days/ https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days... > Not all countries will have an overshoot day. By way of the country overshoot equation above, a country will only have an overshoot day if their Ecological Footprint per person is greater than global biocapacity per person (1.63 gha). There’s a lot of countries not listed, i.e they do not overshoot.
  - mac01021 6y ago
    I'm still wrapping my head around the meaning of those overshoot days. A person's ecological footprint is a multifaceted thing for which I think a single number cannot necessarily provide a very meaningful summary. But here's some other data, that considers only CO2 emissions: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emi... It groups by country rather than income level but, reading between the lines, it seems to me almost certain that the bottom 85% (in income) of people emit more than half of the global total. BTW it is important to consider that a large fraction of the emissions from countries like China and India are in the service of consumption in wealthy western countries. But, I googled, and even in a famously export-heavy country like China, exports only account for 17% of the GDP.
newyankee 6y ago
That is also partly because bottom 50% don't have decent lifestyles. Try commuting for 1.5 hrs in packed local trains in Mumbai and you will definitely wish for a slightly higher carbon footprint in exchange for a better quality of life. Off course, USA standards is unsustainable for the world, but at the least Japanese standards of living are like human rights.
koheripbal 6y ago
The bottom 85% of the global population contribute very little to unsustainability, TODAY. They are going to dominate unsustainability in the next few decades. More coal fired power plants were built in Africa in the last decade than all other continents combined.

nopinsight 6y ago

The rapid and massive increase in the number of global middle class is why virtual everything will be important for the planet. If virtual services and experiences become almost as useful and enjoyable as the real world, people will burn less fuel and cause less negative externalities. (They could be better as well! Even those who enjoy traveling, for example, don’t care for the hassles of airport queuing, getting stuck in sardine-like plane seats, finding laundry places, etc.) Obviously, real-world experiences necessary for genuine, long-term human connections should remain. Note: Although the birth rate is falling, the number of global middle class is expected to rise a great deal in the next few decades, largely due to rapid economic development.