Impending Defeat for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

Most of you think that the world, in general, is getting worse. You are wrong. Citing uncontroversial data on major global trends, I will prove to you that this dark view of humanity's prospects is, in large part, badly mistaken.

First, though: How do I know most of you believe that things are bad and getting worse? Because that's what you tell pollsters. A 2016 survey by the public opinion firm YouGov asked folks in 17 countries, "All things considered, do you think the world is getting better or worse, or neither getting better or worse?" Fifty-eight percent answered worse, and 30 percent chose neither. Only 11 percent thought things are getting better. In the United States, 65 percent thought that the world is getting worse and 23 percent said neither. Only 6 percent responded that the world is getting better.

A 2015 study in the journal Futures polled residents of the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Australia; it reported that a majority (54 percent) rated the risk of our way of life ending within the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater, and a quarter (24 percent) rated the risk of humans being wiped out in the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater. Younger respondents were more pessimistic than their elders.

https://reason.com/2019/08/03/impending-defeat-for-the-four-horsemen-of-the-apocalypse/

Fucking 'Cato Institute' publication  !!!

That's says it all..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

More damn lies from the Koch Bros. financed 'think tank' anti-climate anti-science propaganda machine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Koch

Silly fuck insults "smarter peoples" collective intelligence by concentrating on four positive improvements in human society, while discounting the greater problems of overpopulation, increasing pollution & deforrestation, loss of biodiversity, over-consumption of resources, increasingly fractured societies..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Bailey

'Wolfie wrote:

Fucking 'Cato Institute' publication  !!!

That's says it all..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

More damn lies from the Koch Bros. financed 'think tank' anti-climate anti-science propaganda machine.

Silly fuck insults "smarter peoples" collective intelligence by concentrating on four positive improvements in human society, while discounting the greater problems of overpopulation, increasing pollution & deforrestation, loss of biodiversity, over-consumption of resources, increasingly fractured societies..

You will be OK.

Well, maybe not you, because you have issues. But the sane ones on the planet are doing much better.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190111-seven-reasons-why-the-world-is-improving

How about 7 improvements from the Beeb?


Unfortunately, there are just a lot of people that like to complain and live in misery.

I think it centers around blaming the world for their lack of success.

Maddog wrote:

'Wolfie wrote:

Fucking 'Cato Institute' publication  !!!

That's says it all..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

More damn lies from the Koch Bros. financed 'think tank' anti-climate anti-science propaganda machine.

Silly fuck insults "smarter peoples" collective intelligence by concentrating on four positive improvements in human society, while discounting the greater problems of overpopulation, increasing pollution & deforrestation, loss of biodiversity, over-consumption of resources, increasingly fractured societies..

You will be OK.

Well, maybe not you, because you have issues. But the sane ones on the planet are doing much better.

You're a fucking idiot...

You really should do some homework  on some of these "libertarian" authors that you like to quote on here..

And learn a little about your beloved Cato Institute.

Maddog wrote:http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190111-seven-reasons-why-the-world-is-improving

How about 7 improvements from the Beeb?


Unfortunately, there are just a lot of people that like to complain and live in misery.

I think it centers around blaming the world for their lack of success.

And all the while, you and your favourite fucktard "libertarian" propagandists go happily along your selfish and self-centred consumerist and corporatist ways...

Totally ignoring earlier and wilder bushfires, longer and more intensive droughts, more severe storms and floods, crumbling ecosystems, loss of biodiversity, ever incresing disparities between rich and poor, and the current growth in more extremist political entities..

What both you and your idiotic references keep on ignoring is that mankind continues to consume resources at a rate 50% above sustainable levels.

Maddog wrote:Most of you think that the world, in general, is getting worse. You are wrong. Citing uncontroversial data on major global trends, I will prove to you that this dark view of humanity's prospects is, in large part, badly mistaken.

First, though: How do I know most of you believe that things are bad and getting worse? Because that's what you tell pollsters. A 2016 survey by the public opinion firm YouGov asked folks in 17 countries, "All things considered, do you think the world is getting better or worse, or neither getting better or worse?" Fifty-eight percent answered worse, and 30 percent chose neither. Only 11 percent thought things are getting better. In the United States, 65 percent thought that the world is getting worse and 23 percent said neither. Only 6 percent responded that the world is getting better.

A 2015 study in the journal Futures polled residents of the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Australia; it reported that a majority (54 percent) rated the risk of our way of life ending within the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater, and a quarter (24 percent) rated the risk of humans being wiped out in the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater. Younger respondents were more pessimistic than their elders.

https://reason.com/2019/08/03/impending-defeat-for-the-four-horsemen-of-the-apocalypse/

I think too many people underestimate just how much better life is now than it was say 50 years ago. In termspf access to information, choices of things like food and clothes and travel destinations, equality, entertainment, healthcare, comnectivity, pollution levels (at least in the West) etc.

BUT, a lot of these improvements are only in some parts of the world AND there are many areas where current prosperity could be smashed to pieces.

Wolfie already mentioned the drying up of resources. Add to the climate changes (man made or not), growing geopolitical superpowers and the grotesque pollution of our seas and oceans and it isn't hard to imagine our long era of relative prosperity blowing up in our faces.

On the small scale, we already see a turning point with younger people being priced out of the housing market in many countries.

This is a problem with the whole world. It is cited by some that things are so good we barely need to worry about things actually threatening that same prosperity. It becomes an argument against change.

Things don't tend to stay the same, every major world power/civilisation collapsed, in part, because their existence was built around the idea they'd reached the pinnacle and wouldn't adapt.

Life has generally been getting better, but it would be naive to think it'll stay that way.

 
Yep, too true, that...

And then there is the ever-increasing problem of homelesness in wealthy and advanced 'first world' countries :

The official number of homeless people in the USA is over 500,000 on any one night --  after allowing for transients, those drifting in and out of shelters, 'couch surfing' with friends and relo's, and falling through the cracks in Amerika's defunct 'welfare' system,  the true figure will be somewhere between 2.5 and 3.5 million people..

And then there's more than another 3+ million living in 'trailer parks'.

All told, that's over 2% of Americans don't have a 'fixed' address or 'permanent' home.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States

According to 'libertarian' and 'corporatist' idealogies, those homeless only ever have themslves to blame --  it's never anybody else's fault..

Britain and Oz aren't significantly better off, either --  with over 160,000 and over 110,000 homeless persons, respectively...

https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/culture/article/2017/07/04/us-and-them-what-homelessness-looks-around-world

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:Most of you think that the world, in general, is getting worse. You are wrong. Citing uncontroversial data on major global trends, I will prove to you that this dark view of humanity's prospects is, in large part, badly mistaken.

First, though: How do I know most of you believe that things are bad and getting worse? Because that's what you tell pollsters. A 2016 survey by the public opinion firm YouGov asked folks in 17 countries, "All things considered, do you think the world is getting better or worse, or neither getting better or worse?" Fifty-eight percent answered worse, and 30 percent chose neither. Only 11 percent thought things are getting better. In the United States, 65 percent thought that the world is getting worse and 23 percent said neither. Only 6 percent responded that the world is getting better.

A 2015 study in the journal Futures polled residents of the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Australia; it reported that a majority (54 percent) rated the risk of our way of life ending within the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater, and a quarter (24 percent) rated the risk of humans being wiped out in the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater. Younger respondents were more pessimistic than their elders.

https://reason.com/2019/08/03/impending-defeat-for-the-four-horsemen-of-the-apocalypse/

I think too many people underestimate just how much better life is now than it was say 50 years ago. In termspf access to information, choices of things like food and clothes and travel destinations, equality, entertainment, healthcare, comnectivity, pollution levels (at least in the West) etc.

BUT, a lot of these improvements are only in some parts of the world AND there are many areas where current prosperity could be smashed to pieces.

Wolfie already mentioned the drying up of resources. Add to the climate changes (man made or not), growing geopolitical superpowers and the grotesque pollution of our seas and oceans and it isn't hard to imagine our long era of relative prosperity blowing up in our faces.

On the small scale, we already see a turning point with younger people being priced out of the housing market in many countries.

This is a problem with the whole world. It is cited by some that things are so good we barely need to worry about things actually threatening that same prosperity. It becomes an argument against change.

Things don't tend to stay the same, every major world power/civilisation collapsed, in part, because their existence was built around the idea they'd reached the pinnacle and wouldn't adapt.

Life has generally been getting better, but it would be naive to think it'll stay that way.

Why would it be naïve?

The trends show constant improvement.

And who is saying anything about not changing?

The improvements are change.

Less war, less famine, less childhood deaths, more prosperity, less poverty is change.

'Wolfie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

You will be OK.

Well, maybe not you, because you have issues. But the sane ones on the planet are doing much better.

You're a fucking idiot...

You really should do some homework  on some of these "libertarian" authors that you like to quote on here..

And learn a little about your beloved Cato Institute.

I'm very familiar with Cato.

And you have some serious emotional problems.

Maddog wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:Most of you think that the world, in general, is getting worse. You are wrong. Citing uncontroversial data on major global trends, I will prove to you that this dark view of humanity's prospects is, in large part, badly mistaken.

First, though: How do I know most of you believe that things are bad and getting worse? Because that's what you tell pollsters. A 2016 survey by the public opinion firm YouGov asked folks in 17 countries, "All things considered, do you think the world is getting better or worse, or neither getting better or worse?" Fifty-eight percent answered worse, and 30 percent chose neither. Only 11 percent thought things are getting better. In the United States, 65 percent thought that the world is getting worse and 23 percent said neither. Only 6 percent responded that the world is getting better.

A 2015 study in the journal Futures polled residents of the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Australia; it reported that a majority (54 percent) rated the risk of our way of life ending within the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater, and a quarter (24 percent) rated the risk of humans being wiped out in the next 100 years at 50 percent or greater. Younger respondents were more pessimistic than their elders.

https://reason.com/2019/08/03/impending-defeat-for-the-four-horsemen-of-the-apocalypse/

I think too many people underestimate just how much better life is now than it was say 50 years ago. In termspf access to information, choices of things like food and clothes and travel destinations, equality, entertainment, healthcare, comnectivity, pollution levels (at least in the West) etc.

BUT, a lot of these improvements are only in some parts of the world AND there are many areas where current prosperity could be smashed to pieces.

Wolfie already mentioned the drying up of resources. Add to the climate changes (man made or not), growing geopolitical superpowers and the grotesque pollution of our seas and oceans and it isn't hard to imagine our long era of relative prosperity blowing up in our faces.

On the small scale, we already see a turning point with younger people being priced out of the housing market in many countries.

This is a problem with the whole world. It is cited by some that things are so good we barely need to worry about things actually threatening that same prosperity. It becomes an argument against change.

Things don't tend to stay the same, every major world power/civilisation collapsed, in part, because their existence was built around the idea they'd reached the pinnacle and wouldn't adapt.

Life has generally been getting better, but it would be naive to think it'll stay that way.

Why would it be naïve?

The trends show constant improvement.

And who is saying anything about not changing?

The improvements are change.

Less war, less famine, less childhood deaths, more prosperity, less poverty is change.

But as I literally just mentioned, there are a bunch of loomong crises we are not doing nearly enough to prevent: resource shortages, climate change, rapidly altering geopolitical landscape etc.

It CAN stay that way, but it has to be worked on. When countries actively dismiss climate change and therefore do little to combat it, and when we continue to maddeningly consume fossil fuels and add to the pollution of our world, we are on the road to eventuallt wnding that era of prosperity.

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Why would it be naïve?

The trends show constant improvement.

And who is saying anything about not changing?

The improvements are change.

Less war, less famine, less childhood deaths, more prosperity, less poverty is change.

But as I literally just mentioned, there are a bunch of loomong crises we are not doing nearly enough to prevent: resource shortages, climate change, rapidly altering geopolitical landscape etc.

It CAN stay that way, but it has to be worked on. When countries actively dismiss climate change and therefore do little to combat it, and when we continue to maddeningly consume fossil fuels and add to the pollution of our world, we are on the road to eventuallt wnding that era of prosperity.

Do you think that people talking about looming crises is new?

Technology is dealing with fossil fuels.

The pollution in most countries is going down, and with prosperity it will in other countries.

You don't want good news, because it doesn't align with your politics.

Nothing like using fear to manipulate folks is there?

But I will remember to use the phrase "as I just mentioned" to insist that anything I mention is true.

"For example, man-made climate change arising largely from increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide released from the burning of fossil fuels could become a significant problem for humanity during this century. The spread of plastic marine debris is a big and growing concern. Many wildlife populations are declining, and tropical forest area continues to shrink. And far too many people are still malnourished and dying in conflicts around the globe.


But many of those problems are already in the process of being ameliorated. For example, the falling prices of renewable energy sources offer ever-stronger incentives to switch away from fossil fuels. And hyperefficient agriculture is globally reducing the percentage of people who are hungry—while simultaneously freeing up land, so that forests are now expanding in much of the world."

Maddog wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Why would it be naïve?

The trends show constant improvement.

And who is saying anything about not changing?

The improvements are change.

Less war, less famine, less childhood deaths, more prosperity, less poverty is change.

But as I literally just mentioned, there are a bunch of loomong crises we are not doing nearly enough to prevent: resource shortages, climate change, rapidly altering geopolitical landscape etc.

It CAN stay that way, but it has to be worked on. When countries actively dismiss climate change and therefore do little to combat it, and when we continue to maddeningly consume fossil fuels and add to the pollution of our world, we are on the road to eventuallt wnding that era of prosperity.

Do you think that people talking about looming crises is new?

Technology is dealing with fossil fuels.

The pollution in most countries is going down, and with prosperity it will in other countries.

You don't want good news, because it doesn't align with your politics.

Nothing like using fear to manipulate folks is there?    

 

I'm not a politician, why would I manipulate anyone? My life is good, but that doesn't mean I feel I can pretend problems don't exist, 'I'm alright Jack' is not a philosophy commonly found amount those who are generally to the Left  

And I acknowledged how much better life is in my first response to you.

But the 'other side' of the political divide would have us believe we should stop with all the climate initiatives, stop wasting time and money on certain scientific fields of research and stop making policy to help close the gap in inequality.

These are the reasons liberals, leftists etc continue to raise these concerns. Complacency is not a virtue.

And you make no acknowledgement of the looming resource shortage, nor the massive pollution of our seas and oceans, nor the shifting of geopolitical power. And these, along with the others, are all problems that we are both trying to address, and need to do more to address.

You seem to be saying 'everything is good' presumably because that lines up with your libertarian beliefs that the government should therefore basically take their hands off almost everything - which, for reasons of complacency, would be destructive. And I will make that assumption about your reasoning, since you just did the same by assuming manipulation is the calling of the Left

To reiterate, if 'we' (the Left?) stopped going on about the 'bad news', then what is already being done may not even be happening and we certainly couldn't expect more in the future.

Bad news may not be particularly palatable when everything seems OK for you, but it MUST be highlighted in order to go on whatever problems arise or remain unfixed. That's how progress is made.

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Do you think that people talking about looming crises is new?

Technology is dealing with fossil fuels.

The pollution in most countries is going down, and with prosperity it will in other countries.

You don't want good news, because it doesn't align with your politics.

Nothing like using fear to manipulate folks is there?    

 

I'm not a politician, why would I manipulate anyone? My life is good, but that doesn't mean I feel I can pretend problems don't exist, 'I'm alright Jack' is not a philosophy commonly found amount those who are generally to the Left  

And I acknowledged how much better life is in my first response to you.

But the 'other side' of the political divide would have as believe we should stop with all the climate initiatives, stop wasting time and money on certain scientific fields of research and stop making policy to help close the gap in inequality.

These are the reasons liberals, leftists etc continue to raise these concerns. Complacency is not a virtue.

And you make no acknowledgement of the looming resource shortage, nor the massive pollution of our seas and oceans, nor the shifting of geopolitical power. And these, along with the others, are all problems that we are both trying to address, and need to do more to address.

You seem to be saying 'everything is good' presumably because that lines up with your libertarian beliefs that the government should therefore basically take their hands off almost everything - which, for reasons of complacency, would be destructive. And I will make that assumption about your reasoning, since you just did the same by assuming manipulation is the calling of the Left

I'm saying everything is good based on the historical trends, current figures and my belief that technology will continue to evolve, as it always has.

Pollution in the seas is an issue, but people are already tackling that problem.

We don't have a looming resource shortage. Hell, we have so much natural gas in Texas we aren't even bothering pulling it out of the ground.

Do you remember the phrase "peak oil"?

Don't hear much about that anymore do we.

And again, I'm not saying anything about complacency.

Do you think Elon Musk is being complacent? No one is being complacent, that's why things keep getting better, and will continue to do so.

Why does good news trouble you so?

Eilzel wrote:To reiterate, if 'we' (the Left?) stopped going on about the 'bad news', then what is already being done may not even be happening and we certainly couldn't expect more in the future.

Bad news may not be particularly palatable when everything seems OK for you, but it MUST be highlighted in order to go on whatever problems arise or remain unfixed. That's how progress is made.

I never said it was just the left that talks about bad news. Jesus, have you heard the right drone on about all of the problems they see?

Global warming

Immigrants

Guns

Crime

Hate

Anti Christian

Two peas in a freaking pod that thing they are that different.

"Infant mortality rates have also been falling steeply ​in the rest of the world​. The World Health Organization estimates that the global infant mortality rate was just under 160 per 1,000 live births in 1950. In 2017, it was down to 29.4 per 1,000 live births, about the level of the U.K. and the U.S. in 1950. Vastly fewer babies are dying today because rising incomes have enabled improved sanitation and nutrition and more resources for educating mothers."


Sorry to bother people with good news.

Of course some would contend that babies not dying like the used to will overpopulate the planet.

Maddog wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Do you think that people talking about looming crises is new?

Technology is dealing with fossil fuels.

The pollution in most countries is going down, and with prosperity it will in other countries.

You don't want good news, because it doesn't align with your politics.

Nothing like using fear to manipulate folks is there?    

 

I'm not a politician, why would I manipulate anyone? My life is good, but that doesn't mean I feel I can pretend problems don't exist, 'I'm alright Jack' is not a philosophy commonly found amount those who are generally to the Left  

And I acknowledged how much better life is in my first response to you.

But the 'other side' of the political divide would have as believe we should stop with all the climate initiatives, stop wasting time and money on certain scientific fields of research and stop making policy to help close the gap in inequality.

These are the reasons liberals, leftists etc continue to raise these concerns. Complacency is not a virtue.

And you make no acknowledgement of the looming resource shortage, nor the massive pollution of our seas and oceans, nor the shifting of geopolitical power. And these, along with the others, are all problems that we are both trying to address, and need to do more to address.

You seem to be saying 'everything is good' presumably because that lines up with your libertarian beliefs that the government should therefore basically take their hands off almost everything - which, for reasons of complacency, would be destructive. And I will make that assumption about your reasoning, since you just did the same by assuming manipulation is the calling of the Left

I'm saying everything is good based on the historical trends, current figures and my belief that technology will continue to evolve, as it always has.

Pollution in the seas is an issue, but people are already tackling that problem.  

We don't have a looming resource shortage. Hell, we have so much natural gas in Texas we aren't even bothering pulling it out of the ground.

Do you remember the phrase "peak oil"?

Don't hear much about that anymore do we.

And again, I'm not saying anything about complacency.

Do you think Elon Musk is being complacent? No one is being complacent, that's why things keep getting better, and will continue to do so.

Why does good news trouble you so?

If you think good news troubles me, then you really are just flogging the strawman from the OP. Carry on without me.

Eilzel wrote:

Maddog wrote:


I'm saying everything is good based on the historical trends, current figures and my belief that technology will continue to evolve, as it always has.

Pollution in the seas is an issue, but people are already tackling that problem.  

We don't have a looming resource shortage. Hell, we have so much natural gas in Texas we aren't even bothering pulling it out of the ground.

Do you remember the phrase "peak oil"?

Don't hear much about that anymore do we.

And again, I'm not saying anything about complacency.

Do you think Elon Musk is being complacent? No one is being complacent, that's why things keep getting better, and will continue to do so.

Why does good news trouble you so?

If you think good news troubles me, then you really are just flogging the strawman from the OP. Carry on without me.

There is a certain type of negative person that will twist good news into bad. Maybe that's not you. You didn't seem to interested in all of the positive news in the link and went directly to "but" very quickly.

Things are getting better. Be happy about it. You will probably live to 103.

Only 6 percent responded that the world is getting better.

Why is this figure so low. You can't say only the left is saying things are getting worse, or this figure would be much higher than 6%. This figure shows that both sides are incorrectly under the assumption things are getting worse. Now maybe they will at some point (I don't think it will be for long if it happens), but these survey's indicate that the right and the left think things are CURRENTLY worse than they used to be.

Maddog wrote:"Infant mortality rates have also been falling steeply ​in the rest of the world​. The World Health Organization estimates that the global infant mortality rate was just under 160 per 1,000 live births in 1950. In 2017, it was down to 29.4 per 1,000 live births, about the level of the U.K. and the U.S. in 1950. Vastly fewer babies are dying today because rising incomes have enabled improved sanitation and nutrition and more resources for educating mothers."


Sorry to bother people with good news.

Of course some would contend that babies not dying like the used to will overpopulate the planet.

News for you,  you ignorant redneck clod...

The world is already 'overpopulated', (and will reach around 9 billion humans around 2050..).

And overconsuming our natural resources  (are you really so ignorant that you don't understand that coal, oil and natural gas are 'finite' resources; while trees are still being cut down at a faster rate than they are replaced..).

'Wolfie wrote:

Maddog wrote:"Infant mortality rates have also been falling steeply ​in the rest of the world​. The World Health Organization estimates that the global infant mortality rate was just under 160 per 1,000 live births in 1950. In 2017, it was down to 29.4 per 1,000 live births, about the level of the U.K. and the U.S. in 1950. Vastly fewer babies are dying today because rising incomes have enabled improved sanitation and nutrition and more resources for educating mothers."


Sorry to bother people with good news.

Of course some would contend that babies not dying like the used to will overpopulate the planet.

News for you,  you ignorant redneck clod...

The world is already 'overpopulated', (and will reach around 9 billion humans around 2050..).

And overconsuming our natural resources  (are you really so ignorant that you don't understand that coal, oil and natural gas are 'finite' resources; while trees are still being cut down at a faster rate than they are replaced..).

We have plenty of resources. Many countries are actually losing population as they have dramatically decreased their burthrate, and that trend is spreading with education, technology and prosperity.

The world is not overpopulated, regardless of the insults you place before your incorrect statements.

He can't answer without insults , typical "Keyboard Warrior" ,makes him feel strong !

The basic premise of this thread is accurate -- the world does keeping getting better in many important ways.

I was reading just the other day that in 1985, twice as many children under age 12 died of hunger as do today -- and you have to think about how much smaller the world population was back then.

There's also less war going on across the world than at any other point since the past two world wars. There's also less crime in most developed countries than there was in decades past.

But as others have pointed out, none of this happened because people sat on their asses. People worked hard to make the world a better place, and it worked.

We really should keep it up!

If you asked anyone from any era the answer would be the same. People, in general, are never happy and always think things could be better.

Nothing to see here.

Ben Reilly wrote:The basic premise of this thread is accurate -- the world does keeping getting better in many important ways.

I was reading just the other day that in 1985, twice as many children under age 12 died of hunger as do today -- and you have to think about how much smaller the world population was back then.

There's also less war going on across the world than at any other point since the past two world wars. There's also less crime in most developed countries than there was in decades past.

But as others have pointed out, none of this happened because people sat on their asses. People worked hard to make the world a better place, and it worked.

We really should keep it up!

What alleviated world hunger?

I would say the forces behind that are hardly sitting still.

Like I said...

If you asked anyone from any era the answer would be the same. People, in general, are never happy and always think things could be better.

Nothing to see here.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:The basic premise of this thread is accurate -- the world does keeping getting better in many important ways.

I was reading just the other day that in 1985, twice as many children under age 12 died of hunger as do today -- and you have to think about how much smaller the world population was back then.

There's also less war going on across the world than at any other point since the past two world wars. There's also less crime in most developed countries than there was in decades past.

But as others have pointed out, none of this happened because people sat on their asses. People worked hard to make the world a better place, and it worked.

We really should keep it up!

What alleviated world hunger?  

I would say the forces behind that are hardly sitting still.

20% of the world's human population still goes to bed hungry each night..

10% still can't get adequate nutrition..

Over 20% are "homeless".

The planet has 25% less tree cover than it had 150 years ago..

Pollution, strip mining, urban sprawl are all still advancing at ever-faster rates, outpacing any efforts at repair and regeneration...

Yet everything's apparently okay in your backyard and neighbourhood (?),  so the rest of the world can go hang..

Maddog wrote:

'Wolfie wrote:


News for you,  you ignorant redneck clod...

The world is already 'overpopulated', (and will reach around 9 billion humans around 2050..).

And overconsuming our natural resources  (are you really so ignorant that you don't understand that coal, oil and natural gas are 'finite' resources; while trees are still being cut down at a faster rate than they are replaced..).

We have plenty of resources. Many countries are actually losing population as they have dramatically decreased their burthrate, and that trend is spreading with education, technology and prosperity.  

The world is not overpopulated, regardless of the insults you place before your incorrect statements.

My statements are not innacurate, let alone false...

Just keep on spreading your arrogant "libertarian" lies,  paid for by Charles Koch's Cato Institute..

History will show who the true liars are here.

'Wolfie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

What alleviated world hunger?  

I would say the forces behind that are hardly sitting still.

20% of the world's human population still goes to bed hungry each night..

10% still can't get adequate nutrition..

Over 20% are "homeless".

The planet has 25% less tree cover than it had 150 years ago..

Pollution, strip mining, urban sprawl are all still advancing at ever-faster rates, outpacing any efforts at repair and regeneration...

Yet everything's apparently okay in your backyard and neighbourhood (?),  so the rest of the world can go hang..

Things are far better, not worse, yet people aren't aware of that.

You seem to be one of those people.

Despite ongoing deforestation, fires, drought-induced die-offs, and insect outbreaks, the world's tree cover actually increased by 2.24 million square kilometers—an area the size of Texas and Alaska combined—over the past 35 years, finds a paper published in the journal Nature. But the research also confirms large-scale loss of the planet's most biodiverse ecosystems, especially tropical forests.

https://psmag.com/environment/the-planet-now-has-more-trees-than-it-did-35-years-ago


More good news. Is tree cover where it was 150 years ago.?

Maybe not. But its expanding which means it's getting better.

Trees cover around 30% of the planets landmass...

A 25% decrease over the past 150 years means that back then tree cover was up over 37%...

Dopeydawgs link says that tree cover has increased 7% since 1982  --  7% of 30% over the past 27 years is just 2%, or around 0.1% per year..

At that rate, it should only take around 70 or 80 years to get back to what it was when the planet had a lot less people --  hence the need to keep on planting out more trees to keep up with ever increasing industrial growth.


Links that people put up on here supporting the fallacy of infinite economic  growth often refer to the target of lifting the poorer 80% of the world's population up to the same level as "first world" developed countries..

That means effectively tripling the world's economic output over this century, to cope with the 9 to 10 billion people they want to live at first world standards in 60 or 70 years from now --  where are the required resources coming from to support that growth ? 

'Wolfie wrote:

Trees cover around 30% of the planets landmass...

A 25% decrease over the past 150 years means that back then tree cover was up over 37%...

Dopeydawgs link says that tree cover has increased 7% since 1982  --  7% of 30% over the past 27 years is just 2%, or around 0.1% per year..

At that rate, it should only take around 70 or 80 years to get back to what it was when the planet had a lot less people --  hence the need to keep on planting out more trees to keep up with ever increasing industrial growth.


Links that people put up on here supporting the fallacy of infinite economic  growth often refer to the target of lifting the poorer 80% of the world's population up to the same level as "first world" developed countries..

That means effectively tripling the world's economic output over this century, to cope with the 9 to 10 billion people they want to live at first world standards in 60 or 70 years from now --  where are the required resources coming from to support that growth ? 

The link says it's improving.

You didn't seem to be aware of that.

You're welcome.

Only 11 percent thought things are getting better.


From the OP.

89% of the folks are wrong.

Halloooo? People in every era are dissatisfied. That’s human nature.

Seriously.

Maddog wrote:

'Wolfie wrote:

Trees cover around 30% of the planets landmass...

A 25% decrease over the past 150 years means that back then tree cover was up over 37%...

Dopeydawgs link says that tree cover has increased 7% since 1982  --  7% of 30% over the past 27 years is just 2%, or around 0.1% per year..

At that rate, it should only take around 70 or 80 years to get back to what it was when the planet had a lot less people --  hence the need to keep on planting out more trees to keep up with ever increasing industrial growth.


Links that people put up on here supporting the fallacy of infinite economic  growth often refer to the target of lifting the poorer 80% of the world's population up to the same level as "first world" developed countries..

That means effectively tripling the world's economic output over this century, to cope with the 9 to 10 billion people they want to live at first world standards in 60 or 70 years from now --  where are the required resources coming from to support that growth ? 

The link says it's improving.

You didn't seem to be aware of that.

You're welcome.  

And true to form,  you still "can't see the forest for the trees", (choosing instead to continue ignoring the big picture, using crap 'Pollyanna' statements from the infamous Cato Institute, and a couple of lightweight populist "news" blogsites..)  :

Tree regrowth, replantings and regeneration still isn't keeping up with ever-increasing industrial expansion, urban sprawl, and the resultant pollution levels..

While the tree cover is racing ahead in much of North America and Europe, it is still lagging in Brazil, much of Asia, and around the Pacific Rim..

Simply assessing the total amount of "tree cover" doesn't account for biodiversity;  the difference between 'old growth', regrowth and plantation sites;  endangered and threatened species and 'communities';  total biomass  --   simply looking at net tree cover doesn't give any indication of the potential for either 'carbon sequestration' or oxygen production.  (It will show what areas need more urgent replantings, though --  especially in northern Africa, South America, China, India, parts of Russia, western New South Wales and south-west Queensland, Indonesia, et al..).

"Clear fell" a few square miles of good quality lumber for the pulp industry, and it could take 150 years or more to have genuine "old growth" forests again (400 or 500 years for certain hardwoods..) --  something that will never happen where many over-sized commercial operations are working on 10, 20 or 30 year rotations (and producing a lot of 3rd-rate 'construction' timbers and 'manufactured sheet products' in the process).

The biggest user of Timber is the USA, 80% of their Houses are built with Wood . Maybe that's why they blow away so easily ?

'Wolfie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

The link says it's improving.

You didn't seem to be aware of that.

You're welcome.  

And true to form,  you still "can't see the forest for the trees", (choosing instead to continue ignoring the big picture, using crap 'Pollyanna' statements from the infamous Cato Institute, and a couple of lightweight populist "news" blogsites..)  :

Tree regrowth, replantings and regeneration still isn't keeping up with ever-increasing industrial expansion, urban sprawl, and the resultant pollution levels..

While the tree cover is racing ahead in much of North America and Europe, it is still lagging in Brazil, much of Asia, and around the Pacific Rim..

Simply assessing the total amount of "tree cover" doesn't account for biodiversity;  the difference between 'old growth', regrowth and plantation sites;  endangered and threatened species and 'communities';  total biomass  --   simply looking at net tree cover doesn't give any indication of the potential for either 'carbon sequestration' or oxygen production.  (It will show what areas need more urgent replantings, though --  especially in northern Africa, South America, China, India, parts of Russia, western New South Wales and south-west Queensland, Indonesia, et al..).

"Clear fell" a few square miles of good quality lumber for the pulp industry, and it could take 150 years or more to have genuine "old growth" forests again (400 or 500 years for certain hardwoods..) --  something that will never happen where many over-sized commercial operations are working on 10, 20 or 30 year rotations (and producing a lot of 3rd-rate 'construction' timbers and 'manufactured sheet products' in the process).

I know what the word "improving" means.

You just think the rate of improvement isn't fast enough, which is different than things are getting worse.

I want to add to this thread.

Maddog, I feel you overstate the negativity people feel.

In regards to the poll, 24 hour news coverage and a media that focusses primarily on bad news (for both ratings and agenda) are massive contributors to people thinking the world is in a worse state now than in the past.

However, the reason people don't often make a big deal of good news is likely for the same reason the news don't cover it as much - it isn't as interesting. If something good happens, the response is generally 'great' on which we all likely agree and then move on. There is less discussion to be had.

So both news and gossip tend to touch on the bad or controversial goings on in the world.

This isn't unusual, it's the exact same reason people don't read (or write) books or movies where everything goes well - because it would be painfully dull to read or watch.

This sadly results in people thinking everything is bad and looking on the past (when people still complained things were bad) with nostalgia goggles. My generation does it regarding the 90s, older generations do it with the time they were young.

None of this is really surprising.