|Re: Long-Term Sustainability Notes Online...||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Oliveau (Oliveauaol.com)|
|Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 07:33:44 -0700 (PDT)|
In a message dated 7/6/2007 2:01:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, bb [at] stat.ufl.edu writes: > Eternal optimism is a great quality.....unless it serves to blind > people to hard facts and keeps them from facing very real challenges > in a clear headed and serious manner. We seem to be in an era of > maximum 'fantasy indulgence' here in the U.S. where denial and > magical thinking are epidemic. Hello Everyone, I wanted to add some comments of my own to this very interesting discussion. First,I agree that we need to take a clear headed view of the challenges which face us. I also agree that we can challenge one another (argue) and still be polite :-) Second, the condition of humanity has been getting steadily better over the last century, by almost any measure you care to look at. Wealth, education, calorie consumption, and life expectancy for the whole planet have all been going up, both as a percentage and in absolute numbers. The number of people living in poverty, or without healthcare, or without enough food has been going down, both as a percentage and in absolute numbers. Cancer deaths (after adjusting for longer life) are going down. Of course, we should continue to try and help people who are still living with starvation, poverty, and disease. But our global society, imperfect though it may be, is solving this problem. We are moving in the right direction. Third, increasing wealth causes decreasing fertility. Global population growth is already starting to taper off. We are adding fewer people each year. Assuming continued economic growth, we should see global population start to fall late in this century. Decreasing global population means decreasing environmental stress on the planet. Fourth, until global population starts to fall, we need to carefully consider how to deal with global warming. There are many relatively low-cost actions and researches we can undertake. I believe the latest IPCC report is advocating about 0.1% of global GDP, which seems to be reasonable number to me. But saying we have to spend whatever it takes to minimize greenhouse gasses is like saying we should spend whatever it takes to keep a dying person alive for another week. You have to consider economic costs, and make a clear headed decision. I see bias behavior on both the Left and the Right. The Right pretends that we can't help the poor and so we shouldn't even try, and ignores the impact we have having on the planet. The Left focuses on the negative, and seems to think that all this consumption is evil and people should feel guilty about it. I welcome your comments telling me I have erred, I always learn a lot from people who disagree with me, -Kevin Oliveau ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Long-Term Sustainability Notes Online... Ronald Frederick Greek, July 5 2007
- Re: Long-Term Sustainability Notes Online... Brian Bartholomew, July 6 2007
- Re: Long-Term Sustainability Notes Online... Oliveau, July 8 2007
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.