Jub wrote: ↑2020-05-19 02:06pm
No, but it will and the bread and circuses will keep the people ignorant of it until the displaced masses are arriving on our shores. It's also the responsibility of even the smallest government to be self-serving towards the needs of its people. Thus these poor nations should be forming networks among their peers to offer one another mutual aid.
Sure, but that still doesn't wash the responsibility off the hands of the developed world.
I'd rather see SOMETHING actually done than nothing. Allowing airlines to fail and the cost of overseas travel to drastically rise may be realistic if the damage to the industry by Covid is bad enough. Also, convincing governments such as the Trump administration or whatever the fuck the UK is doing at the moment to support the smaller nations hurt by this will not be possible over that same span of time.
You get something done if the developing world don't see the end of the tourism as another attempt at fucking them over.
You're a useless idealist, the real world will not be so kind as you wish it to be.
It's not about being kind. It's about the only way to break the current cycle of everyone trying to get rich ASAP and flee to a safe haven before the worst effect of climate change is felt. Because it will come across to the developing world as a mere attempt at screwing them over and merely protecting the developed world.
That's how the world is setup to run. If the choice is do nothing about climate change or do something that will hurt the poorest nations on earth... There's not even a choice, you do something about climate change.
And those people in the developing world tourism sector can easily as let's all get screwed over together if they at the least get to survive till tomorrow.
You can dig a basic cesspit away from your drinking water in minutes to hours depending on how hard the ground is. This isn't a significant engineering project and a displaced community should be MORE willing to band together and help one another than one that has had it easy and can be perfectly fine not knowing a single person on their block.
Not if the community is so fucked over in a desperate to make money for themselves for daily survival that no one cares about the latrine or longer health problems.
Show me what they've been doing? Show me some examples that aren't receiving aid, having a violent revolution every decade or two, and courting tourism or resource extraction that do more harm than good in the long run.
Do you think there was no attempt at building up universities, educating their population and trying to set up an industrial base in developing countries?
As I said, India is a complete shit show that lacks the strong centralization that China used to accomplish what they have so swiftly. They shouldn't still be mired with a massively growing population and massive income equality issues.
Yet they still are. Despite having decades of attempts at building up universities and educating their population, they are still stuck with many developmental issues to this day. It is not easy.
Or they stay and use their wealth to better the lives of those around them either via a political campaign, the formation of a non-profit organization, or job creation at home. Fleeing with your wealth and trickling it back via remittance until you can bring your family over only hurts your home country overall. But I guess when a citizen of the first world does something harmful its bad and when somebody from the third world does it's noble or something...
Who said anything about being noble? When the developed world, even those advocating for climate change mitigation policies are still more than happy to let the developing world fend for themselves, why should those with the means to move out of those countries care?
They are merely reflecting the exact same attitude of the people in the developed world.
Hence why for form an alliance of peers and mutually support one another. If the west threatens to embargo a nation you can bet that a bunch of material exporters threatening to nationalize their diamond mines, oil well, etc. would cause people to take notice. You can push around one small nation, but not all of them.
They support one another, court a nation like China or Russia for aid. They aren't stuck suck the US or Europe's cock for eternity.
That requires strong institutional governments, with strong social backing from the population ( which is only possible if the population are not stuck in poverty) which most of those countries do not have. I think you are the one being idealistic rather than me. But your idealism is rooted in a perspective from the developed world.
Let's be idealistic that the developing world can fend for themselves, but we cannot be idealistic about the developed world actually helping them if they are going to wreck economic havoc during the transition process.
So you're saying China or Russia wouldn't happily expand their sphere of influence by protecting a growing alliance of developing nations? Also, what was the response of the west to AfCFTA or CARIFTA? It must have been devastating so I'm sure you can find the punitive actions taken to try to prevent its formation. Please show me all the examples of what the west has done to prevent mutual support networks.
China and Russia will, but those countries are not necessarily there to help those other countries without extracting concession in return. The creation of a free-trade area is not an active threat to the West, because members in those free-trade areas are still actively trading with the West.
Hence why you send educators out to the villages to teach these skills either in the field, where people are scavenging for scrap or after the working day has ended. They can bring in food, clothing, etc. and trade it for the families time and willingness to let them spend a few weeks/months teaching. It wouldn't fix things overnight but if anybody had bothered doing this a few decades ago things would be different now.
How on earth are you going to teach someone computer programming, or engineering skills in a village? You are being rather ridiculous and idealistic here.
That's a shitty plan and I feel sorry your parents were burdened and prevented from a better life by having to take care of an older generation.
It was a shitty plan, but that's the reality for many families in developing country. You are coming from a perspective of someone where those social infrastructure has already been built up for a long time. Before you can daydream about educating children in poor families, you need to actively fix the issues that are preventing kids from going to school.
You can't get out of that way, better to break things now than to allow the system to continue to grow and trap more souls on a treadmill of barely earning enough to see another sunrise.
And what happens when breaking things now will result in people not seeing the sunrise tomorrow? People are going to starve due to you breaking things down today. They don't care about your future, or even their own distant future if they cannot survive till the next day.
What is the other option for taking drastic near term action to combat climate change?
Develop financial support that help developing countries ease the pain of transition first. The cost of any economic disruption as a result of combating climate change ought to be bore by the developed world.
Looks at China... You have a model to follow.
You mean lucking out due to a very particular set of circumstances that created the incentive for the West to move all their factories to China? China lucked out massively in the early 2000s.
Fucking read, what I type Ray. I said they could settle for less and be better off than they are no for having done so. Reaching an attainable goal is better than setting an unreachable one and dying of exhausting running towards it.
The "attainable goal" you have is nothing more than dreaming about wining the lottery.
I'm talking about the governments of those nations building infrastructure, not some village trying to build a field of solar panels out of sticks and leaves. FFS Ray, quit shifting the conversation to the scale people and communities when we're talking about national scale problems.
Green energy is still not as cheap as you think. There are still technical issues in trying to extract sufficient energy for solar panels and etc, production capacity and etc. There is still issues with distribution of green energy. Electric cars are getting massively cheaper, but they are still expensive compared to buying an old car.
We put a man on the moon using less computing power than a Gameboy. Developing nations can still undertake major projects using much older and easier to build technology. They can also start building the infrastructure to create their own machine tools as they look to become self-sufficient. You keep looking at near term costs when I'm focused on long term self-sufficiency.
It's better for 10 million to die now if it means that over the next 50 you'll save 20 million. Future lives have just as much value as current ones.
Not if this is going to vastly increase the cost-per-unit because of a reduced scale of production. Smart-phones are cheap ( even for developing countries) not because they are using older technology, but because the demand is so high that China can manufacture them at a cost that is affordable even for people of developing countries. Relying on older technology means you are relying on older software that aren't being supported any longer.
You can use an older OS that is no longer supported by microsoft of any tech company, but watch as your digital infrastructure becomes an easy target for hackers.
Hell, the whole self-sufficiency technological base was what India has been trying to do ever since Independence! That has not get to them to where they wanted today.
Why are you so focused on Asia? There are places like the Stans, Africa, South America etc. Also, show me what plans those nations tried that failed because they aimed low. This should be easy to find a wealth of papers about so provide them.
Because they are the only countries that have moved on to become advanced economies? The various Southeast Asian countries shunned foreign direct investment during the cold-war, and tried to develop a self-sufficient economy. Singapore happily welcomed it all and gained the monopoly of foreign direct investments and used it to build up its own industrial and technological base.
Being self-sufficient and having the autonomy to close your borders early and being heartless enough to keep even your own citizens abroad from coming back, or sending them right into strict quarantine with sufficient space between families to prevent it becoming a breeding ground, can solve for any pandemic that isn't homegrown. Look at how a nation like New Zealand that self-isolated quickly is doing compared to most places...
Those policies has nothing to do with whether those countries are self-sufficient. It has all to do with countries not being idiotic. This is why Vietnam managed to contain the virus, while it is spreading like wildfire in Indonesia.
Also, again you can work with Russia, China, even India for many of these breakthroughs. You may not get them first, but you can still get these drugs.
Russia, China and India are still not going to be magically more altruistic than the West. You are still going to get drugs and treatment later than those countries. Which isn't helpful in a pandemic if you are unlucky enough to have a mass outbreak and your citizens are dying every day.
K. A. Pital wrote: ↑2020-05-19 02:20pm
If feel sorry for ray because he grew up in a capitalist nightmare where university education is private and exorbitantly expensive.
But it does not change the fact that if you build such a system, you are bound to experience its consequences.
There are state-universities in Singapore, and while they certainly aren't free or cheap, it is still massively cheaper than education in many parts of the West, namely the UK and the US because of state-subsidies.
Under socialism or social democracy, you as a student do not pay for university. Maybe start thinking how to make the world more like that, instead of saying the world is shit therefore people must stick to their harmful behaviours anyway.
For god's sake Stas, that is exactly what I am saying. It's just a form of global socialism instead of socialism for the West and the developed countries. Developed world needs to socialise the cost of economic transition for the developing world. Is that a hard concept for you to grasp?
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.