• @feedum_sneedson
    link
    English
    58 months ago

    Well yeah, that doesn’t even require “proper” evidence. The physical structure alone contains more materials than a car.

      • @feedum_sneedson
        link
        English
        38 months ago

        Of course not, but it’s a wildly disproportionate rate of consumption for an individual, which you’re well aware of. I agree that the ultra-wealthy are something of a totem when it comes to eco-rhetoric, but the fact is they perfectly represent human overconsumption, and acknowledging this as abhorrent and in need of curbing is the first step towards moderation in general. Also, telling the working classes they need to reduce their carbon footprint while tolerating this behaviour from the ownership class is not a coherent message. The vanishingly small kernel of a point you think you have is not contributing anything to the discussion, and I say this as a committed troll.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          28 months ago

          Billionaires should absoultely reduce their consumption and I never said anything to disagree with that point.

          The issue is people are looking for any and every excuse not to do anything. That is an issue and it’s a bigger issue than overconsumption from billionaires.

          Corporations directly try to convince people that there is nothing the individual can do to change the environment so they might as well just use as much oil and gas as they like.

          It’s a direct play out of the oil and gas PR system and people are doing it for free. Billionaires want people to not blame the individual and it’s working.

          All because people want to absolve themselves of all responsibility.

          Billionaires are wasteful. But the damage to the world is coming more from the average person than from the billionaires. Misleading people on that fact is going to to more damage to the environment than anything billionaires do.