3384
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Corporations create the heat and cooling, build the cars and airplanes, and raise the meat for... wait for it... consumers. These things go hand in hand. Asking people to make changes to their lifestyles that will help the environment IS demanding the corporations to stop producing so much pollution. No one wants to take the blame.

When the world is on fire, no one will care, but the idea that corporations are somehow a separate entity from the consumers/individuals that line their pockets with profits is equally irresponsible. It does come down to daily choice, because the corporations follow demand. But no one wants to suffer the inconvenience of changing their lifestyle, so we blame the corporations that we then buy gas, electricity, meat, and cars from. It's blindingly dumb from either direction.

Spiderman points at Spiderman.

Note that the IPCC acknowledges that no one is paying the true cost of energy or food. You could decapitate all corporate executives, and, if we truly wanted to pay the environmental costs of heating, cooling, and food, all prices would go up. If you think things are hard now, give it a decade. Prices for everyone for everything will go up. You could kill all the rich people on the planet, and it wouldn't change that fact, and it wouldn't suddenly make the environment sound. It truly does come down to fundamental lifestyle changes that none of us want to enact.

You cannot eat money.

[-] relic_@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

I'm glad someone else understands this. Everytime I see the statistic about corporate emissions, I can't help but think about how it's so misleading. Exxon et al keep polluting because we keep collectively buying their product.

That doesn't absolve them from their efforts to discredit climate change research, but to suggest they are just some evil entity polluting at will is just ridiculous.

[-] Smk@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago

You can't expect someone not ride a car if they need one for survival.

The same is true for the fast-food industry: a lot of people dont cook anymore and just go to McDonald's. Hell, a lot of people don't even make their coffee in the morning anymore.

If we want to get back on track, make a law that reflect this otherwise, fuck off.

[-] smooth_jazz_warlady@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Admittedly part of the issue is that huge parts of many cities, especially in the anglosphere, are designed in such a way that living there without a car is impossible, because they've been built too spread-out and too far away from anywhere people want to go

And remedying this would basically require densifying everywhere close to urban centres, up to 5 stories in most places, then fucking razing the suburbs to the ground and making it abundantly clear to anyone who wants to live at that old suburban density or lower that the price will be having a septic tank and dirt roads

Electric cars won't change this, btw. Mass adoption of them is not practical due to their weight, strain on the grid, tendency to catch fire in a way that takes 1 entire tender per car, and use of finite lithium, and should be reserved for those with a very specific set of disabilities that make walking difficult while not impairing driving abilities, or those who actually want to live out in the country and put up with aforementioned septic tank and dirt roads

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
3384 points (100.0% liked)

196

16494 readers
2926 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS