4 ms·
Really, really depends on how you live. People in first world countries are worse for the environment than people in third world countries by a wide margin per
by oivey 6y ago
Really, really depends on how you live. People in first world countries are worse for the environment than people in third world countries by a wide margin per capita.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- JoeAltmaier 6y agoWell, in some senses. Yet ocean plastics were reported to be 90% China and India. Soil erosion has been mostly eliminated in the US and is endemic elsewhere. And obviously, since most remaining native species are in 3rd world countries, the threats to them are there. It seems logical to direct efforts to control damage toward the places where they are occurring.
- kiliantics 6y agoChina and India conduct a huge amount of their economic activity in order to satisfy the demand of people in other places though, i.e. that plastic, coal burning, etc. is mostly on us.
- grenoire 6y agoYes, because we exported our environmental responsibilities regarding plastic manufacturing and processing to those countries, which inevitably pollute for us.
- tsimionescu 6y agoUntil recently, China had been importing a vast amount of the world's trashed plastic, ostensibly for recycling, but likely simply dumping a good part of it. The global economy doesn't allow for simple answers to the sources of trash and waste. China (and India) are massive exporters of goods, only a fraction of their manufacturing is consumed internally. And of course, the biggest importers are the US and Europe.
- elmomle 6y agoTo further clarify this comment: living like a millionaire (consuming more in general) increases your carbon footprint.