Have baby boomers wrecked the planet?
Eh, I’m not saying we didn’t scuff it up some. I feel bad about the Amazon rain forest, and the grandkids have been on my case about letting pollution in Asia get so gross. But give me a break. It turns out the last 50 years, far from being the disaster some millennials have claimed, have been, by objective measures, an era of global prosperity without parallel in history. So show some appreciation, you ungrateful pups.
I’m inspired to make these observations by the flurry of commentary attending the recent re-appearance of biologist Paul Ehrlich, one of the leading lights of the we’re-doomed school of futurology. The Population Bomb, the 1968 book Ehrlich co-wrote with his wife Anne, scared the bell bottoms off a generation of college students at the dawning of the modern environmental movement. Among the predictions one or both of the Ehrlichs made at various times:
-
“In the 1970s, hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”
-
“If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
-
“The train of events leading to the dissolution of India as a viable nation [by 2000] is already in motion.”
-
“Unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years [that is, 1989].”
None of these nightmare visions came to pass, of course. The capper was a famous 1980 bet between Paul, who figured the cost of basic commodities was sure to skyrocket due to scarcity, and business professor Julian Simon, who believed human ingenuity would come up with a way to compensate:
Simon challenged Ehrlich to choose any raw material he wanted and a date more than a year away, and he would wager on the inflation-adjusted prices decreasing as opposed to increasing. Ehrlich chose copper, chromium, nickel, tin, and tungsten. The bet was formalized on September 29, 1980, with September 29, 1990, as the payoff date. Ehrlich lost the bet, as all five commodities that were bet on declined in [inflation-corrected] price from 1980 through 1990, the wager period.
I’m always happy to see alarmists get their comeuppance, and am tickled to see the scary headlines switch from OMG, the population is going up! to OMG, the population is going down. Still, in the beginning I didn’t feel a personal stake in the matter. That was before boomers began getting blamed for everything from too much professional licensing to ruining the entire world.
At first one could only protest feebly – hey, don’t blame me for the war in Iraq. But now that definitive data is in, we boomers need take no guff from the younger generation. Setting aside bad apples such as the Butcher of Bosnia – and he was born in 1945 and so by some criteria isn’t a boomer – we’ve given humanity five decades of joy, or anyway considerable improvement. Evidence on this score comes to us from Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Planet by Marian Tupy and Gale Pooley, which I found out about while reading comments on the second coming of Paul Ehrlich.
The book, it must be said, requires some filtering. Tupy and Pooley are admirers of Julian Simon, Ehrlich’s nemesis, and, like Ehrlich, tend to take arguments over a cliff. For example, in a section about China’s now-regretted one-child policy, they make the remarkable claim that “without China’s birth limit, global resources would be almost twice as abundant today.” This gets into some math only a longtermist could love, but the implication is that the solution to any resource crisis = make more babies, an assertion we’ll quietly pass by.
Things calm down after that. The two persuasively argue that:
-
For an extraordinary range of goods and services, from wheat and aluminum to air conditioning and cosmetic surgery, prices have fallen substantially and in some cases astonishingly. They do this using a technique they call time pricing – in essence, how long you have to work to be able to buy something, thereby factoring in both the cost and how much you’re making. Using this metric, they make a plausible case that, far from facing the devastating shortages predicted by Ehrlich, we’ve entered an era of “superabundance,” in which resources in the broad sense outgrow population.
-
True, physical resources may be limited, but miniaturization, virtualization, and so on mean the universe of cool things – that is, resources broadly defined – is indefinitely extensible, a practical example being the smart phone, which “combines … a telephone, camera, radio, television set, alarm clock, newspaper, photo album, voice recorder, maps, compass, and more” into a gimmick that fits in your pocket.
-
They don’t literally mean more people automatically mean more wealth, notwithstanding earlier claims. Rather, more people plus a supportive environment – meaning personal liberty, free markets, access to capital, and so on – allows human ingenuity to flourish and generate enough innovation to support an ever better world. As evidence, they point out, global life expectancy, living standards, and literacy are up, while extreme poverty and other dire statistics are down.
So there you go. And it all happened – well, continued – on the boomers’ watch.
You may say: But what about global warming, species loss, and other looming catastrophes? T&P don’t have much to say about these things, other than noting we used to fret about global cooling. However, the thrust of their argument is we’ll figure something out.
And who’s to say we won’t? I see where Oliver Stone of all people is banging the drum for nuclear power. Meanwhile, your boomer columnist is still flailing away at ignorance – so far, he concedes, without much to show for it. But one wants to leave coming generations something to do.
– CECIL ADAMS
After some time off to recharge, Cecil Adams is back! The Master can answer any question. Post questions or topics for investigation in the Cecil’s Columns forum on the Straight Dope Message Board, boards.straightdope.com/.