• SomeoneElse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s true that for an average Brit, eating beef 3x a week is worse for the environment in a year than their annual holiday to Greece.

    But billionaires aren’t just taking “a few private flights” they’re taking flights more often than I eat meat in the first place.

    I’ve cut down on meat and my water and electricity usage, I haven’t been on a plane in 10 years. I use the car about once a month. I recycle, reuse, repurpose, I very very rarely buy new things. I’m chronically ill and living in fuel poverty. I’m anaemic ffs. How much more are the poor expected to do when then rich do nothing?

    • Bolt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are many problems in the world. Some people like to focus on the ones with the largest impacts, where you can personally do something about it (like veganism). Others like to focus on those where few cause grossly disproportionate harm, as they seem more addressable (like private jets).

      Debating the merits of focusing on one problem over another is interesting, but in my mind the time for it is not when media is being shared that bolsters a cause without coming at the expense of any others. It hurts all movements when people always undermine issues, pointing to another more important from their perspective.

      I highly doubt that most people think you aren’t doing enough for the environment. And I don’t understand why you’d assume that as the implication of this article.

      • flicker@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see this a lot. Someone asserts a truth (eating less meat is good for the environment), some prick pivots to assert that there are other things society can do (the rich take too many trips in private planes!) And every time it happens, it comes from someone who doesn’t like the first assertion and is trying to point at another problem they feel makes their behavior look less stupid and selfish.

        It reminds me of a child caught misbehaving, who points at another child and snitches on them, hoping to distract their way out of trouble. “You can’t be mad at me for stealing a cookie because Jimmy stole three!”

        An enlightened person would make the changes they can control, instead of pointing at ones they can’t as if it absolves them. Hell, even just admitting they don’t want to is less dishonest.

        • kokiriflute@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Let me put it into perspective for you, “self-proclaimed enlightened geniuses”. Let’s say you own a house. I start charging people to dump garbage at your house. It starts leeching into the soil, mold starts growing on the house, and I get rich doing it. I tell you the problem would get better if you stopped producing any trash. Then I take my private jet to my private island and start throwing my trash on someone else’s property.

        • SomeoneElse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Are you referring to me as “selfish” “prick” “childish” “dishonest” “stupid” and unenlightened?

        • CantSt0pPoppin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s true that there are many things that society can do to prevent environmental disaster, and the wealthy are certainly not the only ones who need to make changes. But let’s not forget that billionaires have a disproportionate amount of wealth and power, and they use this power to influence government policy and corporate practices in ways that benefit themselves at the expense of the rest of society.

          For example, billionaires have been major beneficiaries of tax cuts that have shifted the tax burden onto the middle class and the poor. They have also used their money to lobby for policies that weaken environmental regulations and promote climate change denial. And they have used their control over corporations to exploit workers, drive down wages, and ship jobs overseas.

          . They are actively shaping the system in ways that benefit them at the expense of everyone else. And this is why it is so important to hold them accountable. Sure, we can all make changes to reduce our environmental impact.

          But these changes will have a much greater impact if they are made by the wealthy. For example, if billionaires stopped taking private jets, this would have a much greater impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions than if the average person gave up eating meat.

          So, to answer your question, I it’s a global responsibility and everyone including the billionaires living their lives above us all must start acting to help humanity as a whole. We need to make changes that we can control, and we also need to hold billionaires accountable for their actions. Only by doing both can we hope to make a real difference in the fight against climate change and other environmental problems.

          But let’s not kid ourselves. The wealthy are not going to give up their power and privilege without a fight. They will use their money and influence to try to derail any efforts to hold them accountable. That’s why it is so important to build a mass movement of people who are willing to stand up to the billionaires and demand that they be held accountable for their actions.

          The rich are certainly not the only ones who need to make change, but you can’t ignore that they must be held accountable for the damage they do to the world. They have a disproportionate amount of money and power, and they use this power to bend society and governments into their image.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Good summary. For me it is disproportionate harm. I am not going to yell at some regular person for liking fried chicken when their employer is flying on a private jet.

        • glassware@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if billionaires put out a statement that they will never stop private flights, and governments announce that they won’t legislate on it, what’s your plan? Destroy the planet out of spite?

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well first off I would suggest that they go in a submarine. Preference for one that doesn’t have all those pesky regulations in the design.

            After that just put a 20,000% fuel tax on private jets. I fly commercial, and my job matters a whole lot more, so can they. If Musk or Zuck doesn’t show up to work tomorrow things would run slightly better.

            We don’t need them. They need us. They are not super geniuses they are lucky.

            • Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              You missed the other person’s point. It’s not a game and the consequences of ignoring the problem are likely to be massive.

              Also, you know who will be the absolute last to feel pain from stuff like climate change? The wealthy. The overwhelming majority of people that will be affected aren’t privileged and in fact the least privileged are going to suffer the brunt of it.

              You’re not going to punish the rich and powerful and make them regret their choices with this approach. By the time they’re even feeling moderate discomfort, you’ll be long gone.

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Right so the rest of us should suffer when there is a low hanging fruit we can pick.

                This isn’t about punishing people. You want CO2 to go down? Go for the easy wins before you go after the harder to achieve ones. A ban on private jets would hurt effectively none of the human race. There are over 8 billion of us. It wouldn’t even impact a percent of a percent. But yeah if given the option of taking someone in developing world’s motorcycle away or make Bezos have to fly first class I know which I am picking.

                • kokiriflute@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Interesting how so many people here want to ignore the rich people who got rich off destroying the environment and instead want normal people to pay the price for their greed and destruction.

      • SomeoneElse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was a really well written response and I enjoyed your insight. As for why I took personally - I was just having a bad day/week/month. Life is really fucking hard right now.

    • pizza_rolls@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Perfect is the enemy of good. Trust me, I am very irritated by the complete lack of giving a fuck shown by billionaires and large companies.

      But I also know that when it comes down to it the only thing they actually care about is money. And I am one of the people that provides them with that money by choosing to buy their products. Sure, it will take a significant amount of us to make a noticable impact but vegan alternatives have been becoming much more popular and prevalent because there is increasing demand. It’s happening. The dairy industry obviously feels threatened with their stupid wood milk campaign and desperate attempts to ban anyone else from using the word milk.

      That is something I actually have control over. I can vote accordingly to try to stop rich assholes from destroying the earth, but I don’t control it alone. At least when the earth dies I can say I tried.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Perfect being the enemy of good is the exact problem here. There is a much bigger reduction in emissions by reducing meat intake, compared to already eating low amounts and going vegan.

        It’s easier to convince people to eat less meat. That should be the focus

    • glassware@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      In a mastodon thread this week we estimated that banning private jet usage globally would save about 100 million tonnes of CO2, while normal Americans would save 4.5 billion tonnes by reducing their consumption to global average levels.

      Disproportionate harms are annoying but a tiny minority acting disproportionately still matters way less than how normal people act. Banning private jets is pointless if nothing else changes.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because something doesn’t fix a problem completely nothing can be done, yes?

        Also I wonder how many times I have been stuck on the tarmac because of some private jet using my taxpayer funded airport.