How much carbon will a child born today emit in their lifetime?
Thats unknowable.
Your reference to emissions increasing since the industrial revolution is not a forecast.
How much carbon will a child born today emit in their lifetime?
Thats unknowable.
Your reference to emissions increasing since the industrial revolution is not a forecast.
The methodology here is kinda bs IMO.
They're adding up the emissions of the descendants and dividing that by a parents life expectancy.
However, if a society achieves net 0, then surely the emissions of every person there in are 0, so it's disingenuous to count them at today's rates.
Its an attempt to illustrate the environmental cost of over-population, but it needs to be considered within the context of that methodology.
Yeah but, a few or even a bunch of other countries "doing deals" won't really change the calculus for us. It would really take most countries really grovelling to change the dynamic.
Let's not forget, the status quo pre-Trump was the best everyone could achieve for everyone involved.
Everyone hates capitalism and that's fine, there are many worthy criticisms but one benefit is it's ability to find the most profitable balance (for those with the capital). Arbitrary rules (tariffs) are always going to be a net loss.
What I mean is, there's not much incentive for anyone to make a deal because the situation will always be worse for them than it was pre-Trump.
At this point the Trump admin is just trying to find the best way to back down without looking weak. They don't really have a plan to do so, they're just hoping some other shit storm takes center stage.
In the case of Australia, our government decided that it's not worth trying to secure a deal for a number of reasons:
The rubric is going to be similar for other countries.
If nobody bends over for Trump he will end up fucking himself.
IKR. This was the obvious answer 24 hours ago but here we are discussing wear patterns and contrast.
Why is no one else talking about this.
There's no debate. It's at the top of the stairs.
You sure as shit can't vote for anything anymore. Well done.
I'm in my mid 40's.
It's not particularly uncommon for people in regional Australia to own their own house with no mortgage by my age.
It's pretty tough to find a family home that costs less than 10x average wage.
So, as a kind of line in the sand I'd say maybe a third of 45 year olds living in regional Australia could "survive" for 10 years with no income.
This is the same as saying dems are really conservatives. It's just as dumb.
I dont think that's viable really.
They're going to have lots of hardware.
Yes it is. Trump campaigned on genocide and got elected.
Yes but we also consume CO2 if we're part of a society which is net 0.
As i said up top, the infographic is designed to demonstrate the environmental problems caused by over population.
However, the methodology used to represent that impact is problematic.
I'm not saying overpopulation is not bad. I'm not saying you should have n children. I'm saying the numbers here dont withstand a moments critical thought.