Wait, how much money does the Catholic Church have?
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
206 points (97.7% liked)
News
23404 readers
4690 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Between 1980 and 2015, The catholic church paid over $275 million of compensation to victims of child sexual abuse in Australia.
In the US, they spent over $300 million on costs related to clergy abuse. In one year.
To put that into perspective, imaging earning minimum wage in the US, full time hours. Now imaging working for 50 years, saving every single cent you make. You haven't earnt enough to cover a single day of those costs.
All in all, http://www.bishop-accountability.org claim that the church has paid about $4 billion on child sexual abuse cases. This doesn't include the money they spent moving paedophiles around the world so that they can continue to abuse kids.
But we may never know how much money the church really has, because they are actively hiding assets to minimise their value, in an attempt to limit the amount they have to pay to the victims of their crimes.
Hot damn. 4 billion total so far and its probably them trying hard paying as little as possible. So thats got to be like what, 1-5% of what they actually possess?
Do you want that figure in tons of nazi gold or tons of stolen artifacts?
You and your org lost control of the rich class a long time ago, organized religion is just for the commoners these days. You have no power here, the stock market has taken them fully.
They don't have to tell the whole world, just the very very small percentage of people doing a majority of the damage.
Noone is forcing anyone to eat meat or fly
Sure the 0,1% polluting 1000 times as much as average people is really shitty but just cutting their emissions down will not solve the problem
Making huge changes among the population is necessary, too.
Obviously you need to tackle the rich, too, in order to get the population on your side but for laws to happen you also need a decent part of the population already agreeing with that law and living by it.
Animal agriculture is currently using an amount of land that's the equivalent of the entirety of North America.
Yeah but people need food, people don't need hundreds of flights on a private jet each year. One problem is easier to solve than the other so we should start there.
Animal agriculture uses more food than it produces. You need to feed the animals and the meat they produce is considerably less food than what they consumed.
I urge the pope to make profound changes to tackle the pedophilia crisis.
Having sais that, yeah, the world could have, should have, would have, but it's too late already and the next few generations are deeply fucked
What a defeatist attitude.
You mean about climate change?
Edit: trigger warning: I got nothing against you, I don't know who of what you are but... what follows is a very cold dose of reality. Be warned, beware.
Well yeah, that is because we ARE defeated, pretty much. By our greedy overloards. And we let them for decades. And right now, at this point, this is so bad that even if we dead stop all CO2 output today, we're still going to be cooking 20 years from now and we'll be cooking for centuries, maybe even a Millenium before things turn better. This is not doomsday thinking, this is physics.
If you think we can make things better by pulling the CO2 out of the air then let me give you a little cold shower. Pulling all the CO2 out of the air to levels pre industrialization will take about the same amount of energy we got out of burning all those girls since the industrial revolution started, centuries ago.
Basically, for the next centuries, we will need to spend 50% of the worlds energy budget to scrubbing CO2 out the air. And that is only a small part of the picture, because now you have the CO2, and that is in bizarre large quantities. We're talking cubic kilometers per year. You need to store that somehow and if it escapes, you're all back to the start again. So you convert it into plastics? That too costs LOADS of energy and those too over time will degrade and can cause pollution issues. Maybe convert them into billions of diamonds?
Either way, that conversion and or storage too will take up about another similar amount of energy. So now we'll be spending 60-70% of the worlds energy budget for the next centuries on scrubbing and converting and storing that co2
This is not imaginary, this is not panic mode, this is not doomsday thinking. This is the real world bitch, there are not free lunches
And meanwhile we'll be cooking. Loads of animal species will go extinct, food production will dalter causing massive starvation, which likely will cause loads of wars.
People were talking about rising sea water levels for quite a while but I have no idea why. High temperatures will fuck us over long before. Hell, high temperatures are fucking us over already. All that you've seen with forest fires? That's the beginning. Expect every year to become worse, period.
We MIGHT be able to save the world by spraying sulfuric compunds into the upper atmosphere. We did it before in the lower atmosphere with pollution, it caused shit acid rain, it lowered temperatures because it reflects sunlight. We can spray it around in the upper atmosphere using airplanes. It'll still cause (less) acid rain but we're at the point where we need to start choosing if we cut off an arm or lose both legs...
Make no mistake. This is not a "hole in the ozone layer" type problem that can be resolved in a decade. This problem has been brewing for centuries and will take centuries to resolve, in the best case.
Worst case, the ocean starts to burn up a lot of CO2 locked in at the bottom, permafrost starts belching the CO2 locked in there and next thing we're not worrying about global 2 degree rise, were worrying about a 10 degree rise. On the local levels, temperatures may already get to 10-15 degrees higher than normal anyway today.
In any case, all of those best case scenarios is if we dead stop today and we'll, fuck that shit. We're not stopping, we're not even lowering, we're increasing because fuck the next generations. The elites who make the decisions don't give a shit. I cannot do anything myself. So yes, I have a defeatist attitude. Because we're fucked. You're fucked. We'll still live, though. The next generation is that generation that truly will be fucked with a cactus. They actually may not live to see the end of the world.
Fyi, I'm an Earth Scientist working more than 20 years along with others that contribute heavily to the IPCC climate models, and advise the US executive branch on climate issues. I do know a thing or two. Humans have done pretty well through the last ice age when global temperatures were, on average, about 6°C cooler than now. Proto-humans and other primates have lived in much warmer climates than now. Humans can and likely will survive the climate crisis.
The biggest questions are how warm and how fast? How will we sustain ourselves. Globally, we need to shrink in population, and by all accounts it looks like with populations advancing few children are born and later.
I'm not at all optimistic about climates impact on us, but to say we've lost is not helpful.
The rich, on their private jets: "can't hear you, too busy eating caviar"
He needs to excommunicate leaders that don't pass sweeping legislation. He won't but that would be the only way to force their hand.
Too little too late. We're all fucked.