{"id":94482,"date":"2021-08-10T10:03:00","date_gmt":"2021-08-10T17:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482///wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//www.yesmagazine.org/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//?post_type=magazine-article&p=94482"},"modified":"2021-08-10T10:12:51","modified_gmt":"2021-08-10T17:12:51","slug":"what-is-enough","status":"publish","type":"magazine-article","link":"https:/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482///wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//www.yesmagazine.org/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//issue/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//how-much-is-enough/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//2021/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//08/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//10/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482//what-is-enough","title":{"rendered":"Enough for Everyone"},"content":{"rendered":"/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

What is enough? Put that question to any economist or politician, and you are likely to get a blank stare in return. In a society devoted to continuous economic growth, there is no way to answer the question, /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cHow much is enough?/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d because continuous growth implies there is never enough.  /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

However, given the current climate emergency and the broader ecological breakdown that looms in the near future, there are few issues more pressing than that expressed by the single word enough, whether it/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u2019s used with a period (/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cI think there/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u2019s enough to go around./wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d), a question mark (/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cHow much is enough for a good life?/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d), or an exclamation point (/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cCut it out!/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cEnough!/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cBasta!/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d)./wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

The Earth has been telling, asking, and shouting, /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cEnough?!/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d at humanity more loudly every year for the past three decades, but the nations of the world have not been listening. The most recent edition of the authoritative United Nations Emissions Gap Report reveals the price we must now pay for our procrastination, or even more, our full-on neglect. It concludes that humanity must reduce the release of greenhouse gases by a whopping 56% between now and 2030. According to the report, the breakneck rate of emissions reduction now necessary is four times as fast as would have been required had the world started reducing emissions as recently as 2010. /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

The bulk of carbon dioxide overload now in the atmosphere was generated by the long-industrialized nations of the global North, yet the impacts are being suffered disproportionately in the South. Therefore, the United States has a moral obligation to reduce emissions even faster than the global reduction rate that the U.N. is prescribing. And this partial payment in kind on our carbon debt should come in addition to reparations the North already owes not only for climate loss and damage, but also for colonialism, slavery, imperialism, and their associated evils. /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

To eliminate 56% of annual greenhouse emissions in just the next nine years, as urged by the Emissions Gap Report, it will be necessary to clamp a ceiling on the resource consumption of the world/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u2019s affluent, while simultaneously establishing a floor under resource access for those across the Earth who now lack the essentials of a good life. This is at the core of concepts such as /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201ccontraction and convergence/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d (under which the world/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u2019s affluent countries would deeply reduce their ecological impact, converging with low-income nations who will be gaining greater access to resources) and Kate Raworth/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u2019s /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cdoughnut economics/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d (in which the world economy must stay in the /wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201cdough/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/u201d between the outer edge of the doughnut, representing critical ecological boundaries, and the hole, which represents deprivation, the lack of basic requirements for a good life)./wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/n

/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/"/wp-json/wp/v2/magazine-article/94482/"