5 ms·
The study says 50% of the world still lives in 'extreme poverty' (< $5.50 / day). It seems the far better question is how do we improve the standard of living
by serjester 6y ago
The study says 50% of the world still lives in 'extreme poverty' (< $5.50 / day). It seems the far better question is how do we improve the standard of living of these people in a sustainable fashion? The emissions of wealthy countries seems marginal in the longterm once the rest of the world gets plugged in.
For example, while the US has technically cut down on it's emissions it's done this (in part) by largely exporting the coal it used to burn to China. On a per country basis this is great but obviously it doesn't solve the real problem. The Chinese want the same standard of living as Americans and American's taking less flights doesn't seem like a viable strategy.
This is coming from someone that really cares about this but often resulting policies seem incredibly shortsighted in mitigating our worldwide, long term emissions. With that said, this study's methods are atrocious.
- ouid 6y agoThere is nothing sustainable about the current situation, so it seems that this is not a "more important question" but rather a question that needs to be solved in parallel.
- ArkVark 6y agoYou improve the standard of living for these people by making it culturally and technically acceptable and possible for them to have zero or one child, instead of six or seven. The few children that are born will receive much greater investment in their education and upbringing, and the gradually falling population in those regions will improve quality of life for everyone and reduce pressure on the environment.
- scotty79 6y ago1.3 billion people live in developed countries. Even if then rest of the world catches up I don't think calling developed countries emissions 'marginal' is warranted.