Live data from Hacker News

The history of the end of poverty has just begun

ourworldindata.org

371–380 of 449 posts

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#371
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common set of misconceptions, so I'll try to explain why they're wrong. The people of India and China can absolutely maintain a lifestyle with your energy consumption and use of manufactured luxury goods without causing ecological damage. 80% of electricity produced in Denmark is renewables, mostly wind. Historically, renewable energy other than hydroelectric and low-efficiency wind had a poor EROEI, so it…

Thank you for a very thorough reply. Interesting read. We very obviously read different things. Basically what I hear you saying is: we have the technology, we can do it. Please correct me if im reading you wrong. And sure, that is the hope, and I'm not saying that we wont be able to find solutions - simply that our current solutions wouldnt work if scaled to the world. My argument is simply that we're on a massive e…

Oh, well, I do agree that if we just tried to scale up the current fossil-fuel-based economy to the world, that would be ecologically catastrophic. But the infrastructure to do that doesn't exist either! And we're already on the path to switching over to renewable energy, not because of political will but because it's cheaper than fossil fuels in most of the world now. It's definitely possible to implement at scale—as demonstrated by the fact that even in your own country 80% of electrical generation is already solar and wind. That won't solve overfishing or feedlot-induced aquifer eutrophication, but I think we can eliminate those with relatively minor lifestyle changes, changes that will require political will.

I think the case of refrigerators is particularly interesting. Other than energy, they don't consume limited resources; they just contain limited resources until they're thrown away. Some of those resources are scarce, like copper, aluminum, and the refrigerant itself, and because it's profitable, those tend to get recycled already, even without government mandates (though sometimes government mandates can prevent it, like the "steps to stop illegal trade in HFCs" mentioned in the article you link). Others are not scarce, like iron, fiberglass, and polyurethane, so it isn't a problem if they are locked up in a landfill. At some point mining landfills will be profitable when the mineral resources they contain are depleted in their original mine deposits.

The problem of leaks of fluorinated refrigerant is real, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Greenhouse_gase... says that total fluorinated gas (including refrigerants from air conditioners and refrigerators, propellants, sulfur hexafluoride, and others) is only about 3% of the total greenhouse forcing, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions#/medi... gives 2.1%. Plausibly this is the largest climatic effect of buying a refrigerator, even if it's manufactured with 100% coal energy, but in absolute terms it's not that significant. And I don't think the number of refrigerators is going to more than double; according to https://globaldatalab.org/areadata/fridge/?levels=1%2B2%2B3%... even in Bangladesh 40% of households have one, and 35% in India and 99.9% in China; and https://bigee.net/media/filer_public/2012/12/04/bigee_doc_2_... gives the number as 1.4 billion domestic refrigerators ten years ago. So we might see that 3% grow to 5% or something, but not a high enough level to make a real difference. I don't think it's accurate to describe 3%, or even the 10% in the article, as "a huge part in global warming".

I used to have a refrigerator that didn't use greenhouse-gas refrigerants. It was an ammonia-absorption refrigerator, using ammonia, water, and hydrogen. These are unfortunately not available in my country (illegal, I think), and it is not safe to have them inside a house, but it's perfectly reasonable to keep them out on the patio. One big plus is that they can run on stored fuel, whether natural or synthetic, which would be really nice with the frequent power outages where I live now.

Sort of by coincidence, I've been trying to figure out this month how far desiccant-enhanced evaporative cooling can replace conventional vapor-compression air conditioning. I think I've found ways to reduce the system cost low enough that multistage cascades are economical, which ought to make it possible to do not only air conditioning but even domestic food refrigeration with desiccants, though freezing will require a different approach. I found some really interesting research from NREL on this, mostly over the last decade. Desiccant-based systems have the potential to provide not only cooling but also humidity control, heating, food preservation, and household solid waste treatment, and they can run on stored energy for days, which is important both during power outages and to ameliorate the intermittency of solar and wind energy.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> creates enormous inequality i dont know why everyone keeps getting away with statement like this. the proposition of equality as a meaningful metric is absurd at every level of examination. no one is equal to anyone else except on the most trivial and simplistic terms about anything. do you feel inferior to rich people? do you feel superior to poor people? what hogwash. i reject this axiom that inequality is bad. p…

> do you feel inferior to rich people? do you feel superior to poor people? what hogwash. i reject this axiom that inequality is bad. > people don't hate inequality - they hate unfairness. You seem to contradict yourself in the span of two paragraphs. Inequality is OK (according to you) if it is fair. So rich people are superior to poor people? (It’s not about “feeling” inferior in any case. It’s about having enough…

> So rich people are superior to poor people?

Some people have higher earning potential than others. Does that make them superior?

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#373
post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you assume tribes living off-grid are miserable? That doesn't seem to be the case unless they are stricken by a particular disease / natural events, usually they appear to be very content with a simple life. That you would be miserable in their condition does not tell us anything about happiness.

Because I have thought carefully about my lifestyle and, like pretty much everyone, decided that if I have the option of being grid-connected I will take it. It is an open-and-shut case. If people are given a choice, it would be a good day when 1 in 100 would choose to live a life in absolute poverty. If these hypothetical secluded tribes had a choice, they would say the equivalent of "wow, antibiotics! Reliable food…

Are there any downsides of being connected you can think of?

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I had in mind, thanks for asking. Are those tribes who are still living a secluded life in the forests of Amazon or say even those who are completely isolated like in Indian ocean islands considered poor? They've had everything they need and unless there's no external interference(Humans, Weather events e.g. Tsunami) they're living a successful life. Also I have serious issues with the term 'Civi…

There are many things I would like to reply to this comment but I'll be brief and direct. If you consider yourself in any way a Marxist or a leftist, you _aren't_, you are pretty far from it. You are not making a rational analysis of society, humanity or reality based on historical materialism. Going back 200-1000 years is not progress. Period. Clearly, underdeveloped tribes living primitive lives are poor in almost…

To be free of the spectacle of the modern world, what a delicious treat!

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's definitely true but we have some heavier examples than the ones you listed and at the same time massive natural resources which include iron (and many other metals), hydro and timber as well as significant local value generation in high-tech and services. The lack of inequality comes definitely from the very strong labor movement though. > The main industries include motor vehicles, telecommunications,…

Volvo - exploits poorly paid non-union workers in countries like Mexico to make cars and/or car parts Ericsson - charges telecom companies a fortune for crappy gear because there's only 2-3 leading edge 5G equipment providers, which in turn makes it more expensive for people to get telecom service H&M - sweatshop labor for clothes manufacturing I only went through the first half but there are a number of companies in…

> I only went through the first half but there are a number of companies in there that exploit poor people

I didn't say that they didn't, I said that they did but the GP listed weren't the biggest examples.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The percent of chronic homeless in the drug/substance abuse bucket is pretty high, but it’s like comparing the people visible on the streets (chronic) vs someone who ran out of money is and is crashing on a couch or living in their car. The problem is treating both kinds of homeless equally: they have completely different problems with completely different solutions. Give the chronic homeless just housing and they’ll…

> The percent of chronic homeless in the drug/substance abuse bucket is pretty high That's true, but correlation does not equal causation. Many rich people have drugs/mental issues, too. Some drugs are basically a social status symbol in some circles (cocaine, champagne and some other fancy alcohols, for example). Many people become homeless due to reasons unrelated to drugs. Once you're homeless, basic survival beco…

> Many people become homeless due to reasons unrelated to drugs. Once you're homeless, basic survival becomes an every day struggle and it's not hard to see how mind-altering substances can be very appealing in this situation.

For some definition of “many” sure, but many become homeless because of drugs, driving their families to give up on them as they are not able to deal with their problems. Still some are independent but lose their apartments as their $2k/month drug habit eats into rent money. Alcoholism is another problem.

The fact that you claim substance abuse is so pervasive among those who aren’t homeless should provide some evidence that ya, people do fall into homelessness because they aren’t lucky enough to remain high functioning or have the support network that would allow them to abuse while remaining housed.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you somehow unaware of migration into Europe?

They'd rather come here. I've met Afghan refugees here, and refugees from the Middle East. You bet they'd rather be in the US.

> I've met Afghan refugees here [in the US]

How can you not see the obvious problem with that logic?!

(Aside from the anecdata issue.)

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet 100 years ago rich people in developed countries thought the same. The answer was technology (more energy extraction and more efficient use of resources and energy) and now a better standard of living is achieved by several orders of magnitude more people even while the whole population has increased dramatically. Everyone in the world can live by same or better standards if technological progress continues. Of…

100 years ago the west were in the middle of a very powerful industrial upswing which relied completely and explicitly on the exploitation of less developed countries. They maintained political and economic power through military force, which was ensured by their dominance of fossil fuels. I dont think the people in power 100-150 years ago were thinking very much about how to ensure the living standard of the countri…

Nowhere was dominance of fossil fuels or the very powerful industrial upswing stronger in 01922 than in the United States. But the US did not then have the huge international network of overseas military deployment and occupied territories it developed later that century. It did have some overseas territories: the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Cuba, Guam, Alaska, Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Wake Island, the Panama Canal, and arguably Honduras; but these were primarily naval bases and tourist resorts, not pools of cheap labor or troves of resources to exploit.

To be sure, sugar from Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Hawaii, pineapples from Hawaii, and bananas from Honduras were obtained by exploitation of the residents of those unfortunate lands, enriching the US colonists, and gold was mined by the colonists in Alaska; but these resources were peripheral to the projects of US industrialization and energy supplies. 50 years earlier the US had none of them, just huge tracts of land taken by force from Native Americans.

In Britain, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, and Germany, the story was of course quite different. But it is perhaps not coincidental that the industrial power least addicted to plundering resources from colonies abroad became the land most prosperous in the epoch when industry and invention reshaped the world.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who work at sweatshops do so because it's a better option than any other in their society.

If a burn down your house and farm, and you end up working on a McDonalds or a sweatshop to make ends up, you'd do it too because it's "a better option than any other" for you. Same if your parents took you there, because the state is rigged in favor of the rich guys, which have fucked over their prospects, pocket money that would go for development and infrastructure, sold national resources for cheap to foreign com…

These imagined scenarios have very little to do with real life in the poor world.

Living in the modern rich world it's hard to imagine, but the natural state for humanity is being a dirt poor subsistence farmer. Only since the start of Industrialism 250 years ago have regular people been systematically getting wealthier.

In the early industrialized world this path to wealth also started with sweatshops. They were awful, but less awful than the earlier life, life expectancy and wealth grew steadily decade by decade, science and industry prospered, and now we can talk about this on this technological miracle.

No society has gotten industrialized without going through a sweatshop phase. It is now happening across Asia and Africa, and I think it's wonderful.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world has limited resources, but that doesn't mean wealth is limited. People create wealth by work and trade.

How does it not mean that wealth is limited? I mean, how can you have more wealth than the value of world resources?

Here is an example:

Oil was an annoying sticky substance until the liquid-fuelled internal combustion engine was invented in 1876. This invention turned it into the most valuable resource in the world for the next 150 years.

That invention turned useless goo into gazillions of wealth.

Post reply on HN