5.4 Earths!? Environmental footprint calculator results

[Ultralight]

I am not preaching, I am merely lamenting.

The intersection of breeding and consumption is an issue though too. So each couple only has two kids instead of seven. If those two kids are major consumers, it leads to a similar end.

[kib]

But these folks grew up and came of age in an era of American triumphalism and mass abundance. So to younger people -- ones with Master's degrees who work at Starbucks -- this sounds like: "We baby-boomers used up all the good stuff. Now you all must be wise how you consume the crumbs we left you."

Thoughts?

That sounds crappy because it IS crappy. But I also think it's true. From personal and very flawed experience, accepting truth rather than starting a movement to protest it is usually a good beginning toward a workable life.

ETA:

Thank you, baby boomers and Gen X, for inventing things that took our lives beyond the imagination of our grandparents. For technology that allows at least the privileged practically unlimited access to knowledge and to each other, almost immediately. Thank you for medical advances, thank you for creature comforts.

Thank you (not so much), baby boomers and the generations immediately before you, for planned obsolescence and throw-away culture based on maximizing profit, period. Thank you (not so much) for ignoring indigenous wisdom regarding how to treat the planet, and the rights of those societies.

[JaneV2.0]

To be fair, it was the (hippie) boomers who raised consciousness about the environment and simple living, following in the footsteps of early conservationists. (Not to mention being passionately anti-war and pro a lot of fun activities.)

[Ultralight]

Didn't they also become yuppies and capitalists in the 1980s?

[kib]

To be fair, it was the (hippie) boomers who raised consciousness about the environment and simple living, following in the footsteps of early conservationists. (Not to mention being passionately anti-war and pro a lot of fun activities.)

Yes ... but we lost.

[ApatheticNoMore]

To be fair, it was the (hippie) boomers who raised consciousness about the environment and simple living, following in the footsteps of early conservationists.

before that people were frugal because they had lived through the Great Depression!

[Rogar]

before that people were frugal because they had lived through the Great Depression!

Yes. and even in the 50's of my infantile youth consumption was less. The came the two working spouse families who thought two incomes were required to keep up. Take home pay increased as did the size of homes and the things to fill them. I'm sure there is more to the snowballing effect of consumption, but people have been just as happy on less.

[Ultralight]

If we ask ourselves: "Could I be just as happy with less?" and the answer is "yes" then why don't we act upon that?

I could ask myself this. I would answer in the affirmative. But yet, I still don't act (or I act at a snail's pace).

[JaneV2.0]

Yes ... but we lost.

But we tried.

[kib]

Unfortunately, IMO, what the trying accomplished was to create a conservative backlash of money-worshiping, materialistic mindlessness we're still digging out from under. But yes, we did try.