11 ms·

Or the hysteria was overblown, and we instead sabotaged an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous.

hackerlight 3y ago
Easy gamble to make when you don't live in a country with regular 33'c temperatures at 60% humidity. And if your gamble turns out wrong will you compensate the victims? Will you advocate for borders to be opened up as they have to flee their countries?
- masklinn 3y ago
  > Easy gamble to make when you don't live in a country with regular 33'c temperatures at 60% humidity. I’d call it short-sighted rather than easy, over the last pair of decades it’s become rather clear that temperate countries are suffering from worsening heatwaves (longer and with higher temperatures).
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  [flagged]
jijijijij 3y ago
> an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous Please tell us, what you have in mind. More economic growth?
- varelse 3y ago
  Why the burgeoning economic development of full self-driving space needles! Sure, their former homes will be uninhabitable, but imagine how much they'll get selling the land? Why they'll be able to move to Antarctica if that's what it takes! I'm getting a tear in my eye right now over all that profit and shareholder value as we boldly evacuate the planet into the future!
  - thworp 3y ago
    I encourage you to take a crash course in Mooré, go to Burkina Faso and spread the word to the people. "You will not improve your cirumstances, any more prosperity will destroy the planet." I'm sure they will appreciate your wisdom, almost as much as Cubans appreciate their very eco-friendly economic circumstances. Good Luck.
    - triceratops 3y ago
      Cubans are richer than the Burkinabe.
      - thworp 3y ago
        I apologize for my parent comment, it was terrible. I just don't know how to respond to the the broad idea complex that we need less/no economic growth. The way I see it there are two ways it could go. Either the poor countries don't develop or we somehow transfer the economic resources from away from the countries that are currently rich. Non-development is cruel, redistribution is impossible politically and there is also a chance that the recipients go the way of South Africa.
        triceratops 3y ago
        What about sustainable development funded by developed countries? They can help poor countries leapfrog the fossil fuel stage by paying for or subsidizing solar- and wind-powered grids, hydro power, batteries.
- olalonde 3y ago
  Yes, of course. There's a reason why people in developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming. It's because economic growth has a much greater positive impact on their lives than an imperceptibly slow warming of the planet.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > reason why people in developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming Hyperbolic discounting?
    - olalonde 3y ago
      Do you believe that the economic progress of the last century wasn't worth a 1-2 degrees in temperature rise? Most people, especially those in countries that developed enormously, would not agree. The positive impacts of economic progress so far vastly outweigh the negative impacts of global warming.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Do you believe that the economic progress of the last century wasn't worth a 1-2 degrees in temperature rise? Unfair as it is, the last two degrees were less impactful than the next two will be. In the short term, the positives will still outweigh the costs. But in the long run, it’s not clear—particularly for tropical countries—that the gains will be worth the cost.
  - mempko 3y ago
    The majority of people in all country groups are concerned. Maybe you are just in the minority. https://www.undp.org/publications/peoples-climate-vote https://www.undp.org/publications/peoples-climate-vote
  - triceratops 3y ago
    > developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming Chile, Morocco, and India are in the top 10 of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Performance_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Performance_Ind....
- codebolt 3y ago
  As someone who frequents poorer regions of West Africa, that is exactly what I had in mind. Economic growth driven by increased use of hydrocarbons could massively help the populations there.
  - triceratops 3y ago
    Giving a starving person bags upon bags of sugar, and literally nothing else, will definitely help in the near term.
    - codebolt 3y ago
      Making sure they can't have stable electricity, affordable transportation or otherwise decent infrastructure sure won't either.
      - triceratops 3y ago
        It isn't a binary choice between fossil fuel development and no development. There's a third option, where developed countries subsidize sustainable energy for developing countries on the condition they use zero additional fossil fuels.

hackerlight 3y ago

Easy gamble to make when you don't live in a country with regular 33'c temperatures at 60% humidity. And if your gamble turns out wrong will you compensate the victims? Will you advocate for borders to be opened up as they have to flee their countries?

masklinn 3y ago
> Easy gamble to make when you don't live in a country with regular 33'c temperatures at 60% humidity. I’d call it short-sighted rather than easy, over the last pair of decades it’s become rather clear that temperate countries are suffering from worsening heatwaves (longer and with higher temperatures).
carlosjobim 3y ago
[flagged]

jijijijij 3y ago

> an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous Please tell us, what you have in mind. More economic growth?

varelse 3y ago
Why the burgeoning economic development of full self-driving space needles! Sure, their former homes will be uninhabitable, but imagine how much they'll get selling the land? Why they'll be able to move to Antarctica if that's what it takes! I'm getting a tear in my eye right now over all that profit and shareholder value as we boldly evacuate the planet into the future!
- thworp 3y ago
  I encourage you to take a crash course in Mooré, go to Burkina Faso and spread the word to the people. "You will not improve your cirumstances, any more prosperity will destroy the planet." I'm sure they will appreciate your wisdom, almost as much as Cubans appreciate their very eco-friendly economic circumstances. Good Luck.
  - triceratops 3y ago
    Cubans are richer than the Burkinabe.
    - thworp 3y ago
      I apologize for my parent comment, it was terrible. I just don't know how to respond to the the broad idea complex that we need less/no economic growth. The way I see it there are two ways it could go. Either the poor countries don't develop or we somehow transfer the economic resources from away from the countries that are currently rich. Non-development is cruel, redistribution is impossible politically and there is also a chance that the recipients go the way of South Africa.
      - triceratops 3y ago
        What about sustainable development funded by developed countries? They can help poor countries leapfrog the fossil fuel stage by paying for or subsidizing solar- and wind-powered grids, hydro power, batteries.
olalonde 3y ago
Yes, of course. There's a reason why people in developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming. It's because economic growth has a much greater positive impact on their lives than an imperceptibly slow warming of the planet.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > reason why people in developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming Hyperbolic discounting?
  - olalonde 3y ago
    Do you believe that the economic progress of the last century wasn't worth a 1-2 degrees in temperature rise? Most people, especially those in countries that developed enormously, would not agree. The positive impacts of economic progress so far vastly outweigh the negative impacts of global warming.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Do you believe that the economic progress of the last century wasn't worth a 1-2 degrees in temperature rise? Unfair as it is, the last two degrees were less impactful than the next two will be. In the short term, the positives will still outweigh the costs. But in the long run, it’s not clear—particularly for tropical countries—that the gains will be worth the cost.
- mempko 3y ago
  The majority of people in all country groups are concerned. Maybe you are just in the minority. https://www.undp.org/publications/peoples-climate-vote https://www.undp.org/publications/peoples-climate-vote
- triceratops 3y ago
  > developing countries are the least concerned about pollution or global warming Chile, Morocco, and India are in the top 10 of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Performance_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Performance_Ind....
codebolt 3y ago
As someone who frequents poorer regions of West Africa, that is exactly what I had in mind. Economic growth driven by increased use of hydrocarbons could massively help the populations there.
- triceratops 3y ago
  Giving a starving person bags upon bags of sugar, and literally nothing else, will definitely help in the near term.
  - codebolt 3y ago
    Making sure they can't have stable electricity, affordable transportation or otherwise decent infrastructure sure won't either.
    - triceratops 3y ago
      It isn't a binary choice between fossil fuel development and no development. There's a third option, where developed countries subsidize sustainable energy for developing countries on the condition they use zero additional fossil fuels.