this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
429 points (98.4% liked)

Today I Learned (TIL)

6488 readers
547 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
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours 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.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 21 hours ago

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

[–] [email protected] 95 points 1 day 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.

[–] godlessworm 3 points 5 hours ago

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

[–] tee9000 4 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours 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.

[–] godlessworm 4 points 5 hours 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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours 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 3 points 8 hours ago (1 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 hours 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 1 points 5 hours ago (1 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.

[–] godlessworm -1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

you're just typing a paragraph to employ the "job creators" myth as an argument lol

so being a middle man who does nothing but extract and capitalize on needs that people have makes you a job creator? pretty sure mcdonalds didn't create hungry people and people would have needed to buy a burger regardless of whether or not mcdonald's was a multibillion dollar corporation.

i will admit, mcdonalds does create some hungry people tho-- their own workers, who they underpay by massive amounts.

[–] Maalus 1 points 5 hours ago

What's your point? There is no difference in 50 McDonalds locations and 50 independent burger joints when it comes to carbon footprint. If there is a difference, then it is in McDonalds favour - economy of scale, established logistics etc. Probably three different places need to pop up to offset one McDonalds beimg magically removed, each with its own AC, freezers, grills.

[–] Sylvartas 1 points 12 hours ago

Some would argue that we could simply cap the rich instead

[–] captainlezbian 17 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 21 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Carefully Autopsy their Person?
Sounds good.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

Cap them in their knees.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So stop eating cows and eat the rich instead?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

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

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 day ago (3 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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 21 hours 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

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 14 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

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

ACAB.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

... billionaires' security are not cops

[–] Zorque 3 points 1 day ago

True, there's no masking in private security.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day 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)

[–] Gradually_Adjusting 2 points 1 day ago
[–] P1nkman 2 points 1 day ago

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

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

wow they must be breathing really hard then

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

It's the farts actually, they're really stinky.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

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

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (11 children)

There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] SpaceNoodle 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] edgemaster72 7 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day 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 5 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Don't worry, I got this. I went to the shop by foot today instead of driving.

load more comments
view more: next ›