Sure, relative to half the world starving, it's trivial.
Except, half the world is not starving (yet); Bagladesh is currently flooding.
Who says half the world is starving? Not me.
productive farm land. This isn't a few people having to move; its the complete upheaval of most major cities, the concordant economy and farmland.
That's what I don't think is so serious. Cities are constantly being 'upheaved'. We just don't notice so much because new buildings are put where the old ones were. People also are commonly migrating. We had to to cope with the population growth of last century. We also had to find a whole lot of new farmland. We've essentially already been through some of the popular effects of global warming, and come out much better off.
If Bangladeshis need to build a new city faster than natural rebuilding, then other countries should be helping to pay for that, not wasting their money on roof-top wind turbines and petrol taxes which will most likely help nobody if they don't actually stop global warming. If they need more farmland, then other countries should be offering them some of theirs, not making voter-pleasing promises of green jobs, unachievable emission reduction goals and all the other showy, expensive preventative effort that could easily be a complete waste.
Imagine when you're a kid someone saying "You'll have to move out of your family home and go permanently to another town. You'll be forced out by a shortage of land and a collapsed local economy. It might sound bad, you might even want to try to prevent it. But at the end of the day millions of people did and are continually doing that quite happily. I live on the other side of the world.
