An interesting article by Jared Diamond in this month's Edge 233: he writes about the number 32 which happens among other things to define the rough consumption rate of the 1 billion of us in the rich chunk of the world compared to the rest. He goes on to spell out the consequences fairly starkly.
"If India as well as China were to catch up [with first world rates], world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates). Some optimists claim that we could support a world with nine billion people. But I haven't met anyone crazy enough to claim that we could support 72 billion. Yet we often promise developing countries that if they will only adopt good policies — for example, institute honest government and a free-market economy — they, too, will be able to enjoy a first-world lifestyle. This promise is impossible, a cruel hoax: we are having difficulty supporting a first-world lifestyle even now for only one billion people."
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Formation for participraying
As I've been thinking about the difference between group processes for intercessory (rather than 'merely' petitionary) prayer me...
-
I'm not sure people have believed me when I've said that there have been discovered uncaffeinated coffee beans. Well, here's one...
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment