Europeans — especially Germans — are increasingly keen on curbing immigration and are less focused on climate change, according to a study by a Danish-based think tank.
It doesn’t, but we’re all humans and if some of us wreck another person’s country it feels unjust to leave that person stateless.
There might be a basic misunderstanding here… at the rate climate change is going some areas of the earth that are currently inhabitable are becoming uninhabitable. There are farms being swallowed up by desert and the people who were fed by that farm have no where to go.
There are people who live in the artic and those who live in deserts. People even farm in the desert. It might not be great, but itll be more than inhabitable.
You do know that not very many people live in those places, right? It wouldn’t be sustainable. India has over a billion people and the Himalayan glaciers they depend on for water are not getting replenished.
I’m pretty sure moving from a place that has no water to a place that has water does, in fact, fix the problem. Maybe you would prefer them to just die?
Okay, so the plan is move tye entirity of china here then? All 1.4 billion people?
Thats not a reasonable goal. Even you moved in 10 percent of china, youd overwhelm every social service and everything else for that matter. And youd be leaving 90% of china to die while destroying the west’s ability to function.
Now you’re moving the goalposts. And you’ve moved them more than once already.
First you claimed that it would be sustainable for the over a billion people in India to stay where they were because it’s possible to survive in tundras and deserts.
Then you said that moving them to a place where water exists wouldn’t fix the problem of them dying due to a lack of a water.
Then you asked why water would exist in the new place, which was just a silly question for anyone who understands basic geography.
Now you’re talking about moving all of China, when China wasn’t even discussed.
And at each step, you haven’t gone back to the previous one and acknowledged it was a silly thing to say.
It doesn’t, but we’re all humans and if some of us wreck another person’s country it feels unjust to leave that person stateless.
There might be a basic misunderstanding here… at the rate climate change is going some areas of the earth that are currently inhabitable are becoming uninhabitable. There are farms being swallowed up by desert and the people who were fed by that farm have no where to go.
There are people who live in the artic and those who live in deserts. People even farm in the desert. It might not be great, but itll be more than inhabitable.
You do know that not very many people live in those places, right? It wouldn’t be sustainable. India has over a billion people and the Himalayan glaciers they depend on for water are not getting replenished.
And moving them here doesnt fix the sustainability problem either. It just moves sustainability problems here.
I’m pretty sure moving from a place that has no water to a place that has water does, in fact, fix the problem. Maybe you would prefer them to just die?
Who says therell be water here?
If there isn’t, enjoy dying of thirst.
But generally, places that don’t rely on glaciers for their water do better than places that do in a warming world.
Okay, so the plan is move tye entirity of china here then? All 1.4 billion people?
Thats not a reasonable goal. Even you moved in 10 percent of china, youd overwhelm every social service and everything else for that matter. And youd be leaving 90% of china to die while destroying the west’s ability to function.
Migration is not a solution.
Now you’re moving the goalposts. And you’ve moved them more than once already.
First you claimed that it would be sustainable for the over a billion people in India to stay where they were because it’s possible to survive in tundras and deserts.
Then you said that moving them to a place where water exists wouldn’t fix the problem of them dying due to a lack of a water.
Then you asked why water would exist in the new place, which was just a silly question for anyone who understands basic geography.
Now you’re talking about moving all of China, when China wasn’t even discussed.
And at each step, you haven’t gone back to the previous one and acknowledged it was a silly thing to say.