5 ms·

// Honestly I'll ride it out but I do feel bad for people with kids. When I came to the US in the 90s, one of my teachers was freaking out about peak oil and a

// Honestly I'll ride it out but I do feel bad for people with kids. When I came to the US in the 90s, one of my teachers was freaking out about peak oil and about how people shouldn't have kids because that would exacerbate the problem and those kids would have a bad life. Joke's on him I guess. I suspect that at every single point of human history, someone was dismal about something and using it as a reason to not have kids. If I had to bet, people having kids now are not going to regret it ever.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
Of course, it is obviously inevitable that at some point the doomsayers will be correct (and, to note, there are also many times they've been right in the past - I wouldn't have wanted to be born in Europe just before the Black Death, or in Rome just before it fell, or in 510 or so just to be in prime age during what is often called "the worst year in history" in 536, ...)
- xyzelement 3y ago
  Yup however you wouldn't be here today if someone.in your ancestry didn't live through that - assuming your family is from that part of the world
  - sandydan 3y ago
    I’m sure it was deeply unpleasant for my ancestors and I’m currently thinking the world may be up being way more unpleasant for my descendants than it was for me.
    - xyzelement 3y ago
      The point this sub thread is that people always had reason to suspect this and at all previous time it was an error.
      - sandydan 3y ago
        There were lots of doomsayers in history that weren’t wrong I’d the point, yes those of us talking have ancestors that got through terrible times (some of them predicted some not), that wiped out large swaths of people and survived but there are lots of other terrible outcomes that are terrible and unwelcome. My grandfather lived through ww2 m, which was a HEAVILY predicted event filled with doomsaying right after WW1, and it was a point of debate. It wasn’t a pleasant experience, lots of people didn’t make it and entire communities were destroyed, for them it was the end.
      - mistrial9 3y ago
        ... the adjective "Pollyannaish" and the noun "Pollyannaism" became popular terms for a personality type characterised by irrepressible optimism evident in the face of even the most adverse or discouraging of circumstances. It is sometimes used pejoratively, referring to someone whose optimism is excessive to the point of naïveté or refusing to accept the facts of an unfortunate situation.
quags 3y ago
As a 90s kid a remember peak oil. It was taught every where except in one class - economics. The teacher was adamant we would never run out of oil because as the supply dwindled the cost would go up and new oil or other forms of energy would be found. Makes perfect sense now but at the time this was not the norm. Economics ended up being my favorite class. Slightly related he also predicted the internet bubble collapse as I was explaining how I as a teenager was making money on the internet doing nothing in 99 - and his response was that will end because you don’t get money for nothing forever.
- jfengel 3y ago
  "Someone will do something" isn't especially good economics. It's just wishful thinking. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. It's a bad idea to plan on it.
  - mistermann 3y ago
    In this case it was predicted in a specific context though, and he was correct. Do you wish that he was thinking wishfully perhaps?
    - jfengel 3y ago
      He didn't predict the specifics, like fracking. If he knew that it would become economical, good on him for knowing more. But that's a matter of geology and petroleum science; it couldn't be predicted purely from the economics. I point it out only to say "somebody will do something to fix climate change, so don't worry about it" is not a sound position either. The economics predict there will be reactions, but they include a lot of suffering. Dealing with it sooner rather than later will reduce the suffering, and we've already lost a lot of time.
      - mistermann 3y ago
        > I point it out only to say "somebody will do something to fix climate change, so don't worry about it" is not a sound position either. That wasn't his position though. His comment had specific context, your critique did not. Otherwise I absolutely agree with you, my thinking is that humans should try precision in communications (more popularly known as "pedantry", except when scientists do it) about these wicked problems because what we're doing now seems to cause more harm than help, and as you say time is of the essence.
kaba0 3y ago
So based on a single datapoint you have concluded that an event can never happen? “It didn’t rain today, so it never will”.
- xyzelement 3y ago
  No, I am saying that history is full of people saying "it's raining today, better not have kids so they don't die in the flood" and that has never been the right answer in retrospect.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    There are multiple times that would have been the correct decision.
    - xyzelement 3y ago
      If your ancestors had made that "correct" decision, you'd be dead as in not existing. So it sounds like they all made the right decision to procreate despite "reasons" not to.
AniseAbyss 3y ago
[dead]

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

Of course, it is obviously inevitable that at some point the doomsayers will be correct (and, to note, there are also many times they've been right in the past - I wouldn't have wanted to be born in Europe just before the Black Death, or in Rome just before it fell, or in 510 or so just to be in prime age during what is often called "the worst year in history" in 536, ...)

xyzelement 3y ago
Yup however you wouldn't be here today if someone.in your ancestry didn't live through that - assuming your family is from that part of the world
- sandydan 3y ago
  I’m sure it was deeply unpleasant for my ancestors and I’m currently thinking the world may be up being way more unpleasant for my descendants than it was for me.
  - xyzelement 3y ago
    The point this sub thread is that people always had reason to suspect this and at all previous time it was an error.
    - sandydan 3y ago
      There were lots of doomsayers in history that weren’t wrong I’d the point, yes those of us talking have ancestors that got through terrible times (some of them predicted some not), that wiped out large swaths of people and survived but there are lots of other terrible outcomes that are terrible and unwelcome. My grandfather lived through ww2 m, which was a HEAVILY predicted event filled with doomsaying right after WW1, and it was a point of debate. It wasn’t a pleasant experience, lots of people didn’t make it and entire communities were destroyed, for them it was the end.
    - mistrial9 3y ago
      ... the adjective "Pollyannaish" and the noun "Pollyannaism" became popular terms for a personality type characterised by irrepressible optimism evident in the face of even the most adverse or discouraging of circumstances. It is sometimes used pejoratively, referring to someone whose optimism is excessive to the point of naïveté or refusing to accept the facts of an unfortunate situation.

quags 3y ago

As a 90s kid a remember peak oil. It was taught every where except in one class - economics. The teacher was adamant we would never run out of oil because as the supply dwindled the cost would go up and new oil or other forms of energy would be found. Makes perfect sense now but at the time this was not the norm. Economics ended up being my favorite class. Slightly related he also predicted the internet bubble collapse as I was explaining how I as a teenager was making money on the internet doing nothing in 99 - and his response was that will end because you don’t get money for nothing forever.

jfengel 3y ago
"Someone will do something" isn't especially good economics. It's just wishful thinking. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. It's a bad idea to plan on it.
- mistermann 3y ago
  In this case it was predicted in a specific context though, and he was correct. Do you wish that he was thinking wishfully perhaps?
  - jfengel 3y ago
    He didn't predict the specifics, like fracking. If he knew that it would become economical, good on him for knowing more. But that's a matter of geology and petroleum science; it couldn't be predicted purely from the economics. I point it out only to say "somebody will do something to fix climate change, so don't worry about it" is not a sound position either. The economics predict there will be reactions, but they include a lot of suffering. Dealing with it sooner rather than later will reduce the suffering, and we've already lost a lot of time.
    - mistermann 3y ago
      > I point it out only to say "somebody will do something to fix climate change, so don't worry about it" is not a sound position either. That wasn't his position though. His comment had specific context, your critique did not. Otherwise I absolutely agree with you, my thinking is that humans should try precision in communications (more popularly known as "pedantry", except when scientists do it) about these wicked problems because what we're doing now seems to cause more harm than help, and as you say time is of the essence.

kaba0 3y ago

So based on a single datapoint you have concluded that an event can never happen? “It didn’t rain today, so it never will”.

xyzelement 3y ago
No, I am saying that history is full of people saying "it's raining today, better not have kids so they don't die in the flood" and that has never been the right answer in retrospect.
- flangola7 3y ago
  There are multiple times that would have been the correct decision.
  - xyzelement 3y ago
    If your ancestors had made that "correct" decision, you'd be dead as in not existing. So it sounds like they all made the right decision to procreate despite "reasons" not to.

AniseAbyss 3y ago

[dead]