3 ms·

I disagree: There IS plenty of room and resources (more than enough really) if people can figure out how to live ecologically, in efficient high-density cities.

I disagree: There IS plenty of room and resources (more than enough really) if people can figure out how to live ecologically, in efficient high-density cities. However, if they all want to live like suburban Americans with giant gas-guzzling SUVs and highways and McMansions, all powered by fossil fuel, there's nowhere near enough resources for 8 billion people to live like that.

danaris 4y ago
I mean, you're right, but that's a strawman. No one, to my knowledge, has ever seriously suggested that the standard of living we should be aiming for for everyone on earth is "early 2000s immature American low-end millionaire". It's painfully obvious that the reason you even mention giant gas-guzzling SUVs and McMansions is because those things are self-evidently terrible even in small amounts. McMansions are naked examples of conspicuous consumption, and the classic "giant gas-guzzling SUV" is a Hummer H3, which is also very clearly something that people buy because they want to make a statement (usually one about their manliness and/or hatred of "the libs"), not because they genuinely feel that it's the best car for a particular job. Now, there are genuine discussions to be had about just what level of consumption is sustainable for a population of 8-10 billion people, but they don't look anything like what you're offering here.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  It's not just Hummers; any SUV is gas-guzzling. People don't need cars at all, and should be living lifestyles without them. But that's not what Americans want: they want separate houses and cars for everyone, and the planet can't sustain that.
- crtified 4y ago
  They usually don't look anything like the actual lifestyles being lived by the people with the luxury and education to have the discussions, either. (not aimed at you! just a general, cynical observation) For example, one of my region's top ecological spokespeople .... years ago, paid my company many thousands of dollars in the detailed designing of their idyllic, hilltop rural mansion and it's sprawling surrounds.

danaris 4y ago

I mean, you're right, but that's a strawman. No one, to my knowledge, has ever seriously suggested that the standard of living we should be aiming for for everyone on earth is "early 2000s immature American low-end millionaire". It's painfully obvious that the reason you even mention giant gas-guzzling SUVs and McMansions is because those things are self-evidently terrible even in small amounts. McMansions are naked examples of conspicuous consumption, and the classic "giant gas-guzzling SUV" is a Hummer H3, which is also very clearly something that people buy because they want to make a statement (usually one about their manliness and/or hatred of "the libs"), not because they genuinely feel that it's the best car for a particular job. Now, there are genuine discussions to be had about just what level of consumption is sustainable for a population of 8-10 billion people, but they don't look anything like what you're offering here.

midoridensha 4y ago
It's not just Hummers; any SUV is gas-guzzling. People don't need cars at all, and should be living lifestyles without them. But that's not what Americans want: they want separate houses and cars for everyone, and the planet can't sustain that.
crtified 4y ago
They usually don't look anything like the actual lifestyles being lived by the people with the luxury and education to have the discussions, either. (not aimed at you! just a general, cynical observation) For example, one of my region's top ecological spokespeople .... years ago, paid my company many thousands of dollars in the detailed designing of their idyllic, hilltop rural mansion and it's sprawling surrounds.