Bjorn Lomborg: Our Priorities for Saving the World

[Tim Elston]

Provocative little fifteen-minute TED Talk clip of Bjorn Lomborg arguing that of the big problems facing the world, global warming should be at the bottom of the priority list ($150 billion/year to postpone warming by 6 years in 2100, assuming global warming). The so-called Copenhagen Consensus put the priorities, in descending order, as (1) HIV/AIDS ($27 billion in eight years to reduce incidence by 28 million cases), (2) malnutrition ($12 billion to significantly reduce malnourishment for half the world's population), (3) free trade ($2400 billion pumped into global economy in two to five years to bring 200-300 million people out of poverty), and (4) malaria ($13 billion in four years to reduce incidence by half), on the premise that there is more bang for the buck addressing these.

Not the end-all, but thought provoking. Some of the comments below the video are good, too. Lomborg takes a lot of criticism for his ideas.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities.html

(The video apparently front-loads, so it takes a bit to start playing.)

[MacUser]

Who do we pay all this money to... these guys?



Seriously.. should this be voluntary or mandatory?

[Tim Elston]

Seriously.. should this be voluntary or mandatory?

I thought you liked Bush giving $15 billion to AIDS prevention in Africa. I can assure you, that wasn't out of his own pocket.

I'm not sure that there's ever been a year when the United States did not offer international aid, not even during the presidencies of the democratic triumvirate Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe. Even the most limited-government administrations have seen it to be in the United States' interest to cast its bread upon the waters.

Lomborg's point involves the economics of problem solving. Where the money comes from is beside his point, although I'm sure he carries internationalist assumptions. But since our government always has and always will budget for humanitarian aid, it's a legitimate concern to prioritize how that budget is spent on the basis of cost/benefit analysis. NGO budgets are as germane to the point as are governmental ones.