Sino-American Climate Deal?

[Sheilbh]

Saying brown people should have fewer children would be considered racist, so it's not something that can really be addressed in regards to environmental issues.

Saying anyone who wants lots of children should have fewer is with the zero growth stuff what makes the green movement so detestable. They're anti-human. It's perverse.

[mongers]

Saying brown people should have fewer children would be considered racist, so it's not something that can really be addressed in regards to environmental issues.

Saying anyone who wants lots of children should have fewer is with the zero growth stuff what makes the green movement so detestable. They're anti-human. It's perverse.

Well since children are the future, I think in any notional carbon per capita/family/national scheme, allowances should be given to those with children, say and extra 25-50 tonnes of C02e per child.

[mongers]

Do you have a more just scheme in mind?

Not right now. 

My point is the per capita argument is not a slam dunk.

Yeah it's real tricky choosing a metric that fits your preferred outcome.

[Jacob]

Do you have a more just scheme in mind?

Not right now. 

My point is the per capita argument is not a slam dunk.

Okay, fair enough. It's the slam-dunkiest of the ones I've seen so far, but there may be better and/or more practicable approaches.

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah it's real tricky choosing a metric that fits your preferred outcome.

It's quite easy.

[MadImmortalMan]

It is.

White people should stop heating their homes and stop living in cold climates. That's irresponsible.

[Jacob]

It is.

White people should stop heating their homes and stop living in cold climates. That's irresponsible.

What is the preferred outcome that metric serves, and who has that preference?

[Sheilbh]

It is.

White people should stop heating their homes and stop living in cold climates. That's irresponsible.

Nothing to do with that as you know - and it can be done environmentally, just look at Scandinavia or Scotland.

[mongers]

It is.

White people should stop heating their homes and stop living in cold climates. That's irresponsible.

What is the preferred outcome that metric serves, and who has that preference?

Personally I prefer cumulative lifetime CO2 emissions since becoming an adult.

[Jacob]

Nothing to do with that as you know - and it can be done environmentally, just look at Scandinavia or Scotland.

I'm pretty sure Canada could save a fair amount of money (and CO2) by implementing insulation standards in buildings equivalent to those they have in Scandinavia.

[Ancient Demon]

Saying anyone who wants lots of children should have fewer is with the zero growth stuff what makes the green movement so detestable. They're anti-human. It's perverse.

I don't see why it has to be anti-human to prefer a somewhat smaller or at least less rapidly growing human population. It's more of a quality of life vs quantity of life thing. Evidently you prefer quantity. Advocating that people have fewer children should be no more detestable than supporting the reduction of any other form of environmentally destructive activity.

[Admiral Yi]

Catholics. 

[crazy canuck]

Nothing to do with that as you know - and it can be done environmentally, just look at Scandinavia or Scotland.

I'm pretty sure Canada could save a fair amount of money (and CO2) by implementing insulation standards in buildings equivalent to those they have in Scandinavia.

I wish government would do that.  People are worried about the cost increase but when such a small percentage of the cost being made up of construction cost that argument doesnt really seem to hold.

[Sheilbh]

I don't see why it has to be anti-human to prefer a somewhat smaller or at least less rapidly growing human population. It's more of a quality of life vs quantity of life thing. Evidently you prefer quantity. Advocating that people have fewer children should be no more detestable than supporting the reduction of any other form of environmentally destructive activity.

You're missing the bit about choice. There's nothing wrong with it, wanting to impose it on others is anti-human. Wanting to impose it on others without offering the same route that we took to a low birth-rate - economic growth, female literacy, women's lib - is just inhuman.

[Ancient Demon]

You're missing the bit about choice. There's nothing wrong with it, wanting to impose it on others is anti-human. Wanting to impose it on others without offering the same route that we took to a low birth-rate - economic growth, female literacy, women's lib - is just inhuman.

I'm not missing anything. Who said it should be imposed on others?