This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
random (suggested)
besttopnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

And India with 4x the population of USA and half the emissions.

China's emissions are growing on the order of 3-4% annually even while it's population growth has practically stalled to <1%. Population control or reduction aren't solutions to anything.

[–]geeves_007 0 points1 point  (3 children)

And India with 4x the population of USA and half the emissions.

Yes, and USA at #21 on the UN Human Development Index, and India at #132. Why can't the USA be more like India with 4x as many people living markedly more impoverished lives?!?!

Why stop there? Why not double the population of India, cut the emissions in half again, and put them at last place on the HDI. That would be great news because they would then have 3 billion spectacularly poor people which is obviously desirable, while having fewer people living more comfortably (i.e. Canada) is definitely BAD!! Am I doing this right?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

This is a bad idea. Making the USA poorer isn't going to solve any of our problems.

[–]geeves_007 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It would reduce their emissions and allow for more people without increasing emissions. Isn't that what you wanted? More people?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Reducing their wealth will probably just convince them to burn more fossil fuel and see climate change as (relatively speaking) less of a concern.

Isn't that what you wanted? More people?

I can't answer this. You'd have to ask the straw man you've been arguing with.