The memes of the climate

1773 readers

1 users here now

The climate of the memes of the climate!

Planet is on fire!

mod notice: do not hesitate to report abusive comments, I am not always here.

rules:

no slurs, be polite
don't give an excuse to pollute
no climate denial
and of course: no racism, no homophobia, no antisemitism, no islamophobia, no transphobia

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

hairinmybellybutt

157

I believe this is the fear equivalent of "bike-shedding" (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 years ago by Fried_out_Kombi to c/climatememes

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This discussion inevitable devolves into “just do EVERYTHING all at once.” While a fine idea, there is only so much money to go around. We can argue that we should tax the rich more, and I would agree, but Western countries are democracies. People vote for what they think is reasonable. So we really are working with finite resources. We should spend that money where it will save the greatest number of human lives.

The reason I did not point it out is because it is a logical red herring, not to mention, false.

This discussion inevitable devolves into “just do EVERYTHING all at once.” While a fine idea, there is only so much money to go around.

There is plenty to go around, the problem is allocation of resources. The biggest lie you've ever been told is that we can't afford 200 billion to fix problems, but we have 200 billion for tax fraud.

We can argue that we should tax the rich more, and I would agree, but Western countries are democracies. People vote for what they think is reasonable. So we really are working with finite resources.

What is the correlation between democracies and finite resources? I didn't realize that America is the only exporter of food or fixes to problems.

Am I supposed to give up because there is opposition? Because people disagree with me? No, I can only present the facts. We have the resources, we just aren't using them properly.

We should spend that money where it will save the greatest number of human lives.

Agreed, though just because you wrapped your shit cake with nice icing doesn't mean it isn't a shit cake. And is the logical equivalent of a 2 year old saying "We should love everyone."

Of course. We should do that.

But everything you have written is boiled down to excuses on why we can't. Why global warming has to take a back seat for feeding people. Of course feeding people is right, but you cannot argue that it is one or the other. When everything else doesn't work that way.

A. People can divide their attention on different projects.

B. We have the resources to accomplish this.

C. Saying America is a democracy and thus the sole provider of help and solutions across the world is the only country that can eliminate global warming and poverty is logically bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

The reason I did not point it out is because it is a logical red herring, not to mention, false.

I don't think you know what "red herring" means.

There is plenty to go around, the problem is allocation of resources. The biggest lie you've ever been told is that we can't afford 200 billion to fix problems, but we have 200 billion for tax fraud.

I fully agree there is enough to go around. I clearly articulate that it is a political problem. As explained, we live in a democracy, and voters decide how much money to tax wealthy individuals, and how much money to invest in the IRS to audit people. Voters don't want to invest more into the IRS to potentially return some of that suspected tax fraud to which you allude.

What is the correlation between democracies and finite resources?

In a democracy, voters decide how much money is taxed, not you, an individual. You might feel like we should spend more money on both climate change and saving starving people in Africa. Unfortunately you only have one vote, so you alone don't get to decide to do that.

Am I supposed to give up because there is opposition?

I expect you to advocate for what you think is right. That is your democratic right. My premise is not that you should be silent. It is that we have finite resources with which to help people. This is true no matter how loudly you yell at the sky.

Agreed, though just because you wrapped your shit cake with nice icing doesn't mean it isn't a shit cake. And is the logical equivalent of a 2 year old saying "We should love everyone."

Efficient resource allocation saves lives. Why on earth would you argue against that?

Of course feeding people is right, but you cannot argue that it is one or the other. When everything else doesn't work that way.

Everything works that way. Everything. There are finite resources with which to help people. You don't have a magical money box. You're not emperor. Why is this very basic concept so difficult for you?

Saying America is a democracy and thus the sole provider of help and solutions across the world is the only country that can eliminate global warming and poverty is logically bullshit.

Nobody argued this.