Reply to A thread of optimism: why do you think Trump will win in 2020?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "A thread of optimism: why do you think Trump will win in 2020?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

All that is fine but the US per capita consumption is still the highest by a mile. Imagine if everyone wants to consume at the Same level in ROW, and that’s what we are seeing today. The US should set good precedent NOT consumerist precedent that everyone wants to follow. A great nation should set a great example for others to follow. We are setting bad precedent in everything: selecting a conman by slavery era EC to needlessly big homes to BIG SUVs to conspicuous consumerism to poor public transit. An educated and smart people are supposed to think for the society and future generations NOT me me me shortsighted selfishness. It is sad. [/quote]

Once again, consumption is strongly correlated to quality of life: countries with higher quality of life will consume more by definition. Saying that the US per-capita consumption is the highest is not saying much beyond that the US has a high quality of life. By the way, the US does not have the highest consumption "by a mile". You can check the per-capita rankings here:

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

I don't understand why you think consumption is bad. I agree it has become somewhat popular among impressionable youth to criticize consumerism as it is an idea supported by socialism and Marxist thought.  It feeds into their sense of rebellion, to be counter-cultural. So edgy, so exciting! [/quote]

Consumption will be more by $ amount because things are expensive in Europe even though Europeans consumes lot less. That is not a good measure at all.

Let us take carbon emissions/capita in which US is the leading emitter among large countries. If a county like Qatar with tiny population emits a lot per capita it is insignificant in global scale because of their tiny population.

https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/

It is not true that countries with higher income consume the most because there are other factors like tax, subsidies that affect consumption. Western Europe is as rich as the US but their per capita consumption is lot less because they work to reduce emissions unlike the SUV driving Americans. Europeans also use public transit, get a big portion of their electricity from renewables and nuclear energy.

So the US is not a torch bearer when it comes to carbon emissions and infact we are the worst culprit since we are the only ones that pulled out of paris summit. [/quote]

Thanks for fixing the quotes. Things cost more in Europe but that doesn't suddenly mean a dollar spent in Europe somehow has less value than a dollar in the US. If an egg costs $2 in Europe, that egg represents $2 of economic value in Europe, even if the egg only contributes $1 of economic value in the US since it only sells for $1 here. What counts is the dollar value, not what the underlying good/service is. Different goods/services have different values to different people in different locations.

I agree with the observation that the US has higher greenhouse gas emissions per capita compared to other developed countries. This is definitely one area we need to improve on. My point in this regard is that if you look at our energy use and emissions history, it is going in the right direction: energy consumption per $ GDP is going down, and our overall emissions are also going down despite growing population and growing consumption. Our goal should be to continue driving towards further efficiency. Consumerism is not the problem, it is the solution.

I am puzzled by your Paris accord comment. Were you not aware of the recent revelation that China is responsible for damaging the ozone layer to the detriment of decades of efforts by the US and European countries? Guess who is a Paris Accord signatory? How is being a part of the Paris Accord meaningful when most of the developed countries that are part of the Paris Accord failed to meet the proposed emission reduction goals. Guess which country achieved the largest reduction in carbon emissions? Read this:

https://capitalresearch.org/article/u-s-achieves-largest-decrease-in-carbon-emissionswithout-the-paris-climate-accord/

Again, don't fall into the common liberal trap of thinking that defaulting to some international body means a country is doing the right thing. Results matter. Empty promises don't. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics