• 3volver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    8 months ago

    You know what could also limit global heating? If the fucking wealthy stopped flying in their private jets and stopped cruising in their yachts and stopped buying their 3rd house. Focus on the solutions. Subsidize green energy, tax the oil companies, ban private jets, etc. You know, things that would have an actual impact.

    • bfg9k@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yep, sick of being told I’m the problem and should change my way of living when a single private flight dumps more CO2 into the air than my car puts out in half a year, not to mention the fuel usage.

      • Teppichbrand@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        A person in their private jet is selfish and inconsiderate. They believe they are entitled to it and thereby destroy our livelihoods. They should not fly privately just because they can. They should voluntarily stop, and if they don’t, it must be prohibited.

        A person who still eats meat is selfish and inconsiderate. They believe they are entitled to it and thereby destroy our livelihoods. They shouldn’t do it just because they can. They should voluntarily stop, and if they don’t, it must be prohibited.

    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      The only thing that will really fix the issue is if we stop breeding like rabbits. It doesn’t matter if we reduce the ecological footprint of individuals if we keep growing the population.

      • Teppichbrand@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’re wrong! Population growth is not an issue, it’s our western lifestyle, like eating meat and flying in airplanes. Our planet can easily feed 10 billion people healthy food. But not if we don’t quit meat.

        • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          We could also reduce our population and keep eating meet and doing other things that make life enjoyable. Besides, who wants to live on a planet that crowded?

          • Smoogs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It isn’t that crowded. If you live in a city center it’s easy to assume everywhere is the same but that is cognitive dissonance. Many buildings are empty because of short term renting (which could easily house the homeless) and way too expensive for what it should be

            much land that would be considered for food crop is taken up with concrete which actually increases the temperature of the earth making things much worse.

            The need for grain and water to feed for meat production is 10 x more than what human would consume so there already is more than enough food for humans.

            You’d still need humans to manufacture and distribute food to exist.

            So Cutting down the human population to contain The very life style you want is still a problematic lifestyle to be sustainable

              • Teppichbrand@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Look at the link I posted. It’s simply not true anymore. We will hit 10 billion, but because of things that already happened. Overpopulation is not the issue anymore. Our lifestyle is.

      • JimboDHimbo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think we should do the extreme opposite of breeding like rabbits to the wealthy instead. Like the polar opposite of creating life.

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Except there is a decline in population growth as numbers stop seeing family life as an option because of demographic transition. You do not remain able to reproduce your whole life and as new generations come up to the reproductive age they face a very different life to what it once was such as what the baby boomers were going through (hence the name). This is not meaning to pick at the boomers but to point out that the name was coined for a reason.

        • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Except there is a decline in population growth

          You’re talking second derivative here. It’s still growing, it’s just growing a tiny bit slower than it used to.