DontRunMeOver

Drinking water isn't much of an issue in the richest countries, which are leading the global warming debate. And fighting poverty implies closing the rich-poor divide, which isn't necessarily something that the rich and powerful want because then they lose their edge, or just the satisfaction of being really rich.

Purely enviornmental issues are in some ways morally easier to push because the actual objectives (stop ocean levels rising, improve air-quality, maintain biodiversity) are ones which most people would agree with, at worst they'd just be indifferent. The ways to achieve these objectives have many problems, hindering industrial development and modes of transport, but the end result is desirable for everybody.

Issues with a more human aspect can be more difficult because however many people would benefit if the objective were achieved, there would be some people who will be worse of, or at least feel like they were worse off. Better access to education, healthcare, jobs etc. benefits those who don't have it at the moment but it can be bad for those who already have it and those people tend to be the most powerful.

I think you get what I'm trying to say and I've already laboured the point a bit.

You really need to reference that. You didn't make it up?

__________________