[acdha]

I agree with the value of people but would factor quality of life in. We’re currently projected to have something like a billion people seriously disrupted by climate change and all of us noticeably worse off which puts you in questions like how much human misery undercuts that.

Obviously the solution isn’t “kill 4B” and especially because the climate impacts and causes are very unevenly impacted - 300M Americans have generated more greenhouse gases than the billions in Africa or Asia who are being impacted first.

[RcouF1uZ4gsC]

> I agree with the value of people but would factor quality of life in.

The median quality of life is the best it has ever been for humanity.

[acdha]

It’s equally true that the number of miserable people in the world is greater, too (lower percentage of a bigger number, but it’s not evenly distributed. If you’re a Bangladeshi farmer getting wiped out multiple years running due to climate change-amplified flooding, you probably aren’t comforted by the fact that even poor Americans can watch Tik Tok.

[adastra22]

For the past couple of decades, at least, more people have been lifted out of poverty than have been added to it through population growth. So no, even by that metric things were worse off in the 70's or 80's than they are today.