- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/3153498
The study is this one
You must log in or register to comment.
Capitalism. Because money is more important than life.
We’ve looked at the data. It looks grim and concluded that it costs too much to avoid extinction.
Not that Soviet Union, Eastern European socialist states, China etc have been great for the environment.
That’s not true, but I don’t care to refute a talking point from 1991. Google it .
I don’t know why you’d even bother to make a reply at that point
Just googled it. None of the top 10 countries are socialist.
What exactly did you google?
“It.” I googled it.
I expected nothing less
Would you be willing to take minimum wage pay for the rest of your life if it meant you would save the earth a fraction of a percent?
If conservatives would get out of the way and actually allow a true minimum wage vs the punative wage they enforce now, there would be no shame in a minimum wage lifestyle whatsoever. Many, many people do not have ambitions beyond living a reasonably small life, in a small home, with an average family and a handful of friends, taking the occasional vacation, retiring, and dying someplace familiar. Some say it’s sad, others say it’s human nature, either way it’s a reality people need to reckon with; because that’s what a lot of people picture when they say “there’s more to life than chasing money”.
Im asking if you would take one for the team, lower your requirement for life, maybe live paycheck to paycheck in order to reduce consumption. Im not saying ‘take the occasional vacation’… im saying maximum reduction in overall capital for circulation. Spend less. Would you be willing to live in poverty to reduce your emissions? Its a yes or no question
Everyone who hates capitalism so much, put your money where your mouth is. Stop spending on internet, dont buy those things you dont need, donate your extra cash to those in need. Stop larping and end capitalism… starting with your excess. You are part of the system you despise if you keep donating your extra funds to the capitalist systems. End that cycle. Prove the capitalists wrong.
I’m already doing most of that (for personal reasons). It won’t change the world or even the country though. Real change won’t come until we eat the rich.
It would be more helpful if you learn to own your piece of the problem. You can make a fraction of a tiny piece of a difference if you live well below your means. Not until more people embrace it, then no mass change will be made.
Think of it like this. If you give less money to the rich, they will have less money to spend. You kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
Welp, I sold my home and my car, quit my job, cut my spending down to essentials, power what I have left using solar … looks around … Yep we’re still fucked!
I said a fraction of a percent. You can also say you dont care about your emissions and continue as is.
Damn you sure owned that guy! “Oh you don’t like, global warming? Just go live like an ascetic for the rest of your life. That won’t affect the course of climate change, but at least you won’t be a hypocrite!”
Fuck off with that shit. Take your gottems to Twitter or some shit
I was basically asking “how much does your emissions really matter to you”. If you dont care about how much your dollar being spent on stupid shit emits pollution then just say that. Say you are blissfully ignorant and refuse to change your ways because you are a baby and hope someone fixes problems you contribute towards.
My “contribution” to this “problem”? In the context of global climate change, my contribution is a miniscule, worthless fraction, a grain of sand in the Sahara. It is NOT RELEVANT to the conversation around climate change because it’s presence or absence changes nothing.
Your attempts to paint global warming as the product of individual action completely misses the point, and you wind up simply doing damage control for the oil barons, car manufacturers and jet-setters that are actually the cause.
Please lecture me as to how the people who sell things for the people are responsible for the things people choose to buy.
You can start a movement to reduce your consumption but you would probably not convince anyone. Not even anti capitalists want to reduce their consumption. Its much easier to blame oil barrons and car manufacturers rather than you wanting to enable them. Im sure you are looking forward to buying your next car or your new house or go on that European adventure you were looking forward to or buy a new gym outfit or go to that new bar or buy that new game or… thats just life right? Im sure you cant even imagine your life without those desires. And yet its their fault for providing that for you.
Im also sure you know nothing about supply chain. Nothing about regulation emissions. Nothing about reducing… but its so easy to say ‘eat the rich’ as if thats a catch all solution.
Do i say lead by example.
Gladly. But I’m keeping my ‘effing bidet.
No, you are right. I wouldn’t subject myself to more suffering to save the human race. This is only because I know the choice of extreme poverty versus destroying the environment is only relevant because a person, you, decided these were the only two choices possible. To explain differently when we all decide we’d rather just end civilization as we know it than changing the status quo, as an individual I’m just along for the ride.
Thank you. You are right, I am the arbiter of all pollution knowledge and I am giving you 2 choices. Option 1 is continue as is and hope choices are made for you. Option 2 is you do something about it and stop complaining. I dont know if becoming a hermit is the best option but if this cause matters to you, then you should lead by example.
This is where you got it all fucked up. You keep pointing the finger at normal people. Point the finger at people who have their hands on the levers. I sure as he’ll can’t wake up tomorrow and turn off the pollution machine but sure as shit there is 100% someone who can.
Tell me, who has their hands on the levers on these pollution machines. Calculating emissions for big businesses and making changes to their operations to reduce impact is actually my day job so if thats what you had in mind ill rationalize that.
But please humor me. Tell me how its big business and not the consumers.
I won’t do your homework for you. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Haha hoho
Yes.
Maybe so that people don’t just die of existential despair?
It is very depressing to see our planet go to hell.
I feel like we’re reminded every day on here, it gets tiring to a point we don’t pay attention anymore.
People don’t usually care to read the same thing over and over again for decades like that
Because news is sales, and this doesn’t sell. In fact, it will likely hurt sales. And almost everyone can’t do anything meaninful about it on an individual, immediate level. So it’s hard to think about and hard to act on.
Bad for business, hard to digest = out of scope for corporate or government media.
Well, there is a really simple, meaningful thing we could do:
We could all go vegan.
If we stop paying for these products we’d solve 25% of the climate catastrophe tomorrow. But you don’t want to. The rich, smart, educated people in the west won’t even give up cheese to save their childrem from collaps.We could all go vegan.
do you have a plan to make that happen?
Just do it, commie! Be the change you want to see in the world. :)
me choosing to do it doesn’t change what the other 8 billion people do. do you have a plan besides telling people on the internet “just do it”?
No no, no plan, they suggested a hypothetical situation which, if it magically became true, would have an impact. As a result, they are absolved of any further effort, justification, or planning. This is the sum total of their contribution to solving global climate change. Think of them as an “ideas person,” or a “visionary leader” who “manages by walking around.”
After receiving this totally sufficient direction from an obviously exceptional thinker, it is entirely up to you to figure out how to make it work. If you don’t, then you are not being a team player. Further criticism, or even just asking clarifying questions, is evidence YOU are the problem and are not taking constructive, solution-focused steps, and your bad attitude will be noted in your next performance review cycle along with being assigned full responsibility for letting the climate go to shit.
You sound so cynical. I didn’t suggest to i.e. stop driving cars by tomorrow, because that would (as you stated) not be possible in the real word. Stop eating animal products is very different, because you choose to do so every single day and you CAN stop it tomorrow. It’s a super simple action we could take. But most people don’t do it because most people don’t do it.
I obviously already broke that habit and I invite you give it a try.
As usual the mainstream journalists don’t understand what the paper is about and produce hysterical headlines.
If you read the paper it does in no way say the earth is going to be uninhabitable. It does say that they have modelled which bits of the earth will become less habitable and they are areas of high population density, and also that the risk is reduced sognificant of climate change is limited to 2 degrees. That’s starkly different from the headline.
That is also without any critical appraisal of the paper. My first thoughts are how accurate is transfering static lab based measures of habitability to dynamic open environments?
This research is mildly interesting but like most research frankly it is of limited scope and utility, and unfortunately a great deal of research is actually unreproducible dross.
On top of that a lot of journalism is unthinking dross. This makes a good headline to feed the beast that is the internet but it does not reflect the reality of the climate crisis.
It’s in the news every day. What are you on about?
The same news that is obsessed with Donald Trump 24/7?
I just don’t understand why people aren’t taking climate change seriously?/s
because we know
deleted by creator
I’m not sure why you think consumer tech is the thing to blame for emissions.
If you look at what’s being shipped, it’s clothing, food, and a LOT of plastic. Consumer electronic goods are a tiny fraction of the shipping/manufacturing load. You likely eat multiple times a day, but buy a new phone once per year at most.
Food waste, clothing, offices, and business travel are some of the biggest emitters. The yearly electronics purchase is a blip on the radar in terms of climate impact. (Arguably, the electricity running the devices has a larger impact).
Not good for profits, so it’s swept under the rug while we deal with the bloated cheeto craziness as a diversion for something else even shittier happening.
Because it’s not new(s). badumtiss.jpg
We can’t cost the shareholders.
Be cause there is still enough plausibility of denial, for now…
The problem is we know but we are still making it worse! Capitalism has proven it can’t fix this situation only speed it up!
Where are the other bones ? The skeleton?
