Climate Change vs. Economy


Environmental deterioration and extreme weather are real, the facts and figures are too obvious to be dismissed or neglected. One of TV commercials says, ”Nature does not need people; people needs nature.” For the sake of economic growth (and wiping out poverty), the world still seems to continue to abuse nature and pollute environment. So what is your take on this issue?

 

Desk

Author: Desk


Leave a Reply

8 Comments on "Climate Change vs. Economy"

Notify of
avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
TriP
Guest

We are to busy with politics and too greedy to realize that we are destroying our environments. True, that nature doesn’t need people. I think we are free diving into our own destruction if we don’t start to alter our attitude towards nature.

Marta
Guest

On this years there are several numbers of wildfire happened,swallowed forests and its ecosystem. Recently it occurred in California Montana, Canada Portugal are the examples of the events. These catastrophes has been our sign that climate is changing or sloping down to lower temperature than before. The heat temperature conducts severe climate change which is as an artificial catastrophe that caused by human selfishness, deforestation, water and air pollution that made by many kind of irresponsible corporations. Modern economy has failed maintain the nature!!!

Jaka
Guest

Environment vs economy is so relevant today, especially in Beijing. They’re struggling to choose between industrial power to maintain economic growth or to re-purify the air from smog, which according to this article (link below) 1.1 million people are killed by air pollution.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/27/news/economy/china-crackdown-pollution-economy/index.html

Sentosa
Guest

It’s never enough to achieve prosperity (economically) if human population escalates out of control. It’s like chasing our own shadow…I remember Malthus prediction on how population growth tends to outrun the food supply. It’s so true.

And then, technological advancement become the answer to tackle food shortage…

Proportionally, technological advancement exist and being developed to accommodate human population, however when it’s dominating the world, technology also give negative impacts to our surrounding. It’s also proved that technological advancement leads to consumerism – where consumerism leads to exploitation.

Jeff Hasan
Guest
Economy was a good thing , for example a historic trade called the silk road that had been a cultural exchanges back in the centuries.. there were mutual benefits to the east and west traders or consumers, connected many distinct cultural manifestation from natural resources and technology.. But since the economy array going to be “one model fits all” , its common sense is likely an illogical system..it highly demands to profit without considering the longevity of sources… as the result nature become a victim… In fact science has invented things to prevent nature deterioration from human behaviors…but it seems… Read more »
Kiran B.
Guest

Maybe as long as human are still chasing economic welfare, we are still oblivious to the consequences of our actions to nature. Or perhaps we mistake welfare with survival.

Rama
Guest

The world is sick and the catalyst for it’s disease are human. If we save the nature we also save ourselves.

On the other hand do the majority of mankind should perish for nature sake? This is hard for us to reflect upon but unavoided if we want nature to endure.

Natural selection anyone?

Jaka
Guest

Yes…natural selection happens all the time… “victims” of earthquake, wildfires, tornado, tsunami, new and ever-changing disease, etc is the proves. No matter how hard we try to avoid natural selection, nature always find a way for it.

“Men argue, Nature acts” – Voltaire

wpDiscuz