this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
450 points (98.1% liked)

Today I Learned (TIL)

6556 readers
3 users here now

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.

Share your knowledge and experience!

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/4199810

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 109 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

This infuriates me.

I would actually love to do more to REDUCE my carbon footprint, but it's prohibitively expensive to.

But billionaires (and millionaires) can literally greenify every aspect of their lives, even be carbon-neutral or carbon negative! But they choose not to.

I think taxing the rich just isn't enough. We need to CAP the rich. There should be no billionaires.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They can spend millions trying to reduce everyone’s carbon footprints. Like literally they can lobby for trains and shit. But no they won’t.

[–] godlessworm@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

yeah we do need to bust a cap in the rich, i agree

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Carefully Autopsy their Person?
Sounds good.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Cap them in their knees.

[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Its designed to infuriate you. This is not personal emissions of billionaires, its including their businesses.

[–] godlessworm@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

brother, that doesn't make it any better. these pieces of shit can do more pollution in 90 minutes than any of us will in a life time since it's for their business? the one which is such a massive operation of exploitation and extraction that it earns them billions of illbegotten dollars, which is why they're being talked about to begin with?

"this infuriating shit was designed to infuriate you, don't be infuriated, just accept it instead!"

this is the same stupid shit argument as "um bezos can't pay more taxes bc he doesn't actually have all the money his networth implies, that's not how networth works" as if people mad at jeff bezos or any of these other worthless rich parasites don't know that, as if we need someone like you to explain some stupid shit to us

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

This is not personal emissions of billionaires, its including their businesses.

The Oxfam report says that private planes and "superyachts" are contributing factors, as well as investments in polluting industries like oil and mining.

Nowhere does it mention that their businesses are what's contributing to their carbon footprint. They are explicitly talking about their lifestyle choices.

So, I'm not sure where you got that info from, but if they are including businesses that these billionaires run, I'd be interested in seeing that data.

Mind you, the majority of these billionaires are in software... a business that's very easy to convert over to a carbon-neutral model, especially with their resources.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

A billionaire is a business themselves. One person can't even passively possess a billion dollars without tons of support staff

If you separate the direct actions of the person from the actions of the staff required to maintain and grow their wealth, you're missing most of the reason why billionaires are so harmful to society

[–] tee9000@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Either we need the figures to represent a billionaires emissions when dealing only with their personal benefit, or we offset the current figures with the benefit to society for their ventures.

Im sure their personal emissions are bad enough. We dont need to make shit up. If willful ignornace had a physical form, it would be Lemmy's mascot. Truth is the only thing that matters.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But again, it's all for their personal benefit. A human Their money is managed to grow by any means, and that has a lot of knock on effects

They generally either put their money in funds with the highest returns (which often use unethical and illegal but accepted practices, and the best ones require large minimum deposits), or they directly own large percentages of a company and use that influence when it suits them

I see where you're coming from, but I think the line is blurry. Their direct personal actions don't capture the full extent of their actions, but this also assumes full responsibility for their ownership, where honestly it's impossible to know what level of emissions the companies would have if the billionaire's wealth machine wasn't involved

I wouldn't say this is totally unfair to say though - at the end of the day they own what they own, and letting others do your dirty work doesn't absolve you of responsibility

The fact that their life would barely be affected if they added emissions to their criteria for investment makes this worse - these are the figures the billionaires should be looking at to make decisions

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The line isn't blurry, it's disingenuous. Those companies hire thousands of people. They serve millions of people. Otherwise advocating against billionaires using this argument means you automatically argue against any modern solution to a problem. No stores, no supply chain, no agricultute, no medicine. Hell, you can't even go for earlier periods - Genghis Khan was a billionaire and deserves flak for the gazillion horses his army used which contributed to climate change.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Some would argue that we could simply cap the rich instead

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 44 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Please don’t use this as an excuse for. “It doesn’t matter how much I emit then”.

Use this as motivation for grassroots and political action aiming to stop the concept of billionaire from existing.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think I just found out I can reverse my entire life's footprint if I can manage to blow smoke in one billionaire's face.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Probably two lives, given their security will likely shoot you in the face.

ACAB.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

... billionaires' security are not cops

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

True, there's no masking in private security.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well they both use the threat of violence to reinforce the status quo. So in my mind they are effectively the same.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I feel like that's missing the point of ACAB.

The problem with cops is that there are good cops who generally behave well and genuinely want to serve and protect their communities. The reason they're still bastards is because of the unions that they keep (and support). They have some bad apples, and not removing them from the bunch means the bunch gets spoiled.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

The problem with cops is that there are good cops who ~~generally behave well and genuinely want to serve and protect their communities~~ do not report bad cops.

They are law enforcement, enforce the law. No exceptions.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, I agree completely. I was just explaining that it's not ACAB because literally all cops are out there getting away with extrajudicial beatings. It's ACAB because they don't throw out the bad apples (aka. don't report bad cops)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zoop@beehaw.org 7 points 3 weeks ago

Fuck yeah! You get it.

I'm glad you addressed this. As soon as I read the title of the post, I knew there would be people who use it as an excuse not to try to do what they can to reduce their negative affects. Which is so incredibly frustrating. Every! Little! Bit! Counts!

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

Also I doubt anyone in this comment section is average.

The average sits somewhere between us and the all the people in third world country who emit practically no carbon pollution

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

The only way to stop it is when we're hungry enough, and it's time to eat.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xorollo@leminal.space 28 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So stop eating cows and eat the rich instead?

[–] undefined@links.hackliberty.org 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Whether or not you eat the rich, please consider not eating the cows.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 19 points 3 weeks ago (15 children)

There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 3 weeks ago

Damn, thank god we killed plastic straws for people with sensitive mouth problems. Thank god Musk can ride his jet 24/7.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

For perspective, that's over 400,000x as much. As in 40,000,000%.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

When no one was looking, Lex Luthor polluted forty million percent more than an average person. He polluted 40,000,000% more. That's as many as four tens (times a million)%. And that's terrible.

[–] moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

wow they must be breathing really hard then

[–] Zementid@feddit.nl 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Of course... Work hard, breath hard... A million times harder than you or me, based on income.. /s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

At some point, things are gonna get bad enough that the masses will turn on them. That’s why they’re all buying islands and building bunkers. We should do it now, while it can make a difference.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Allowing to self exile to islands will make it easier to trap them. Simply destroy their means of leaving.

Bunkers are even easier, burying them in trash.

[–] Default_Defect@midwest.social 3 points 3 weeks ago

But I'm the asshole for not using the public transportation my city doesn't have. Anyway, I need to get to the grocery store I should start walking now so I can be there before it closes in 2 hours.

load more comments
view more: next ›