iraq_lobster

Another attempt by imperialists to shift attention from their wealth hoarding by scapegoating immigrants who are the real value creators: they pay taxes to sustain public services, but also benefit the rich with good value labor. Rest of the population would complain: oh, no! immigrants now are lowering the bar for life quality, while in fact they aren't the real enemy. Hopefully people would see right through it.

The Canadian economy experienced a contraction “unprecedented outside a recession,” according to a new analysis from National Bank Financial, a trend driven, at least in part, by a population spike that has squeezed per capita GDP growth.

The bank’s monthly economic analysis says that “signs of an economic slowdown have been multiplying.”

“Consumption stagnated for the second quarter in a row, a stinging setback in the current demographic context characterized by record population increases,” the report says.

The recalculated GDP per capita — which the bank’s economists had estimated had contracted by 2.4 per cent — now sits, they say, at a 4.4 per cent contraction during the third quarter.

The report also finds that while Canada’s inflation rate is at 3.1 per cent, costs for shelter are growing at six per cent annually.

The first nine months of 2023 saw the single fastest population growth since Confederation. Around one million people joined the Canadian population in that time, exceeding growth in 2022, already a record year for population growth. Since July 1, 430,635 people have come to call Canada home.

Less consumerim and lower GDP is the way: living a happy life with the advent of technology should theoratically allow us to work 1 day per week and dedicate the rest of the week to be spend with family and pursuing personal interests, all while having reliable public services like health and transport, while maintaining an ecological lifestyle so the offspring could inherit a healthy habitat. People need to unite to make this a reality, because we are weak when we are divided. We don't need flying cars nor Mars to be populated, a sustainable future is easily achievable for the bottom 80%.

I am aware that the use of such source is frowned upon. Nonetheless, the elonjettracker dude got busted from X© and now has his own sub. Interesting content to say the least, and it does help put things into perspective. Also i hope Lemmy implements flairs as a feature, this post could thus use a discussion flair, to signal that such content is up for debate.

A full breakdown of the top 10 celebrity CO2e offenders:

1. Taylor Swift: 8,293.54 tonnes (per year), or 1,184.8 times more than the average person's total annual emissions.

2. Floyd Mayweather: 7,076.8 tCO2e (tonnes of CO2 emitted, per year)

3. Jay-Z: 6,981.3 tCO2e

4. A-Rod ( J-Lo's ex-fiance and baseball player) : 5,342.7 tCO2e

5. Blake Shelton: 4495 tCO2e

6. Steven Spielberg: 4,465 tCO2e

7. Kim Kardashian: 4268.5 tCO2e

8. Mark Wahlberg: 3772.85 tCO2e

9. Oprah Winfrey: 3,493.17 tCO2e

10. Travis Scott (Kylie Jenner’s Beau) : 3033.3 tCO2e

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/02/worlds-richest-10-produce-half-of-global-carbon-emissions-says-oxfam

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-per-capita-carbon-emissions-by-country/

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

Unusually, for the actual rocket launch, the CO2 isn’t really the biggest deal here. It’s possible to use rocket fuel without any carbon in it at all – NASA has been using liquid hydrogen for decades, and Jeff Bezos’ rocket used it too. But commercial hydrogen is made in a very carbon-intensive way, although it’s possible to make with zero emissions.

So it’s hard to untangle rocket launch emissions. We need more research before we can be really definitive, although we know it’s not great. As a ballpark, one researcher has suggested that per person, a space tourism flight is 50-100 times worse for the atmosphere than a long-distance plane flight.

In SpaceX’s case, the Scope 1 emissions are the emissions from the rocket fuel, transporting rockets and SpaceX employees about, and any fuel burned during testing and building.

But SpaceX doesn’t publish its emissions widely. Tesla, Inc., one of Elon Musk’s other ventures, is also surprisingly opaque about the emissions required to build its electric cars – something other electric car manufacturers have been much more open about. And Musk himself doesn’t seem particularly interested in addressing this. In fact, he recently tweeted that corporate environmental and social governance – a common method of reporting and addressing environmental impacts – was “the devil incarnate”.

Daddy Elona on the other side launching rockets like hot potates, while some people trying to lower their thermostat and eat ecofriendly food. is it vain ? idk ..