经济衰退的问题是最贫穷的人很可能最能受到它的影响。很明显的是从比例的角度来讲，穷人是造成环境问题的最小的因素。

The problem with a recession is that the poorest are most likely to feel the effects. Of course poor people contribute proportionately less to environmental problems.

也许关键问题是哪里的经济衰退。 过去的二十年助长了经济增长是无限的并且有利无弊的观点。那些越是富裕的人旅游的越多，越会去买更大的汽车和房子以及更多无用的东西。在一个把经济增长当作首要任务的社会，人们的地位是由其消费多少决定的。所以，我认为，我们应该有一次经济衰退，至少在世界富裕的地区应该有一次。也许这样会给我们机会考虑生命中什么才是最重要的。
汤姆

Perhaps the issue is whose recession? Thelast two decades have encouraged the idea that growth is infinite and always a good thing. People who feel more affluent travel more, buy bigger cars and houses and more unnecessary goods. In a society that counts growth as its main purpose, status comes from material competition. So I say, yes, let's have a recession, at least in the affluent parts of the world. It might give us a chance to think about what matters in life
Tom

衰退中的经济可能会不情愿把钱投入到昂贵的、新型可持续技术上，而是依赖旧的、廉价的煤技术获取能源。同样的情况也出现在食品产业中。谁在经济低潮中能够岿然不动？麦当劳，因为他们出售的食品便宜。

Economies in recession might be reluctant to spend money on expensive, new sustainable technologies and instead rely on old, cheap coal technology for energy.

The same for food consumption. Who does well in a down economy? McDonald's, because their food is cheap.

在发展到一定阶段的时候，我们不得不停下来努力思考一下，是否经济增长等同于社会进步，以及我们到底想从中得到什么。我们目前的系统能够持续不断发展吗？我们如何定义“进步”？虽然经济保持增长，人们享受着繁荣和物质文明，我们西方人却显得并不快乐。究竟积累多少财富才能满足人类的欲望？我们需要时不时敲响警钟，提醒我们为自身的消费习惯付出的代价，以及全球经济高速增长的后果。

Somewhere along the line, we have to think long and hard about whether economic growth and progress should be equated, and what, exactly we want out of it all. Can the system really just keep growing? How do we define "progress"? With all this growth, with all our prosperity and material goods, we in the West don't seem very happy. How much is enough? We need a wake-up call from time to time, reminding us of the cost of our consumption habits and of the consequences of exponential growth for the planet. -- Matthew

请看看那些保留着最原始的环境和雨林的国家吧，缅甸和民主刚果共和国。在那里，政治因素已经抑制了经济的发展。人和自然正在前所未有的广泛范围内对立着，而结果却是人永远胜利，自然节节溃败。所有那些以妥协于快速经济发展为前提的看似和谐的环保论调都是伪绿色的宣传，用恐吓的命令来欺骗大众。唯一的希望就是大范围的经济衰退，正如二十世纪中叶的经济衰退迫使欧洲的资源消费水平成为了世界所有国家头顶上的紧箍咒。这是比立法，或家庭、商业自愿行为强大得多的一股力量。然而，这种程度的衰退是无法想像的，只有核战争或气候突变才能使得经济水平骤降。最终只有气候变化自身才能带来负面的经济压力，从而降低二氧化碳的排放量。

Look at the countries with the most pristine environments and rainforest - Burma, the Democratic Republic of Congo - where political factors have held back rapid economic growth. Man and nature are now pitted against each other on the most dramatic scale ever conceived, with man eternally the victor and nature the loser. All the comfortable talk of protection of nature being reconcilable with rapid economic growth is pseudo-green propaganda to deceive the masses of a terrifying order. Massive economic recession that forces mid-twentieth century European resource consumption levels as a cap on all countries of the world is the only hope. This would be a far more powerful force than legislation or voluntary activities by households or businesses. However, recession on this scale is unthinkable and could only be precipitated by nuclear war or climate change itself. Ultimately only climate change itself will bring about the negative economic pressures that will reduce carbon emissions.

环境与经济之间的关系不是简单的线性相关。就气候变化而言，它随工业化的发展而演进。经济衰退会减少对新技术及替代性资源的研发。实际上，其他环境问题，如生态系统和生物多样性的消失更为触目惊心和紧迫，它们与经济并不关联。因此，不同的问题需要用不同的方式对待。 -Sean

The relationship between environment and economy is not a linear correlation.In the case of climate change,the issue is growing with the development of industrialization.The depression economy would lead to reduce the R&D of new technology and renewed resource which might replace the current one.Actually,for other environmental problems,the loss of ecosystems or biodiversity are much more visible and urgent without exactly being linked to economy. Hence, different issues should be dealt with by different means.-Sean