• ArcoIris@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    To be more specific, there’s nothing wrong with those things being a CHOICE. The problem is with specific individuals telling people that millions of others need to cut their carbon footprint to near zero so that they, as an individual, can keep using their private jet without feeling guilty. And that attitude can go die in a hole. But you knew that.

    • AWildMimicAppears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Yeah, i agree on all of those points; but i believe not everything should boil down to personal choice, we have governments to steer things.

      Subventions for livestock should be on the chopping block - the emissions from livestock are about 1/3 of all of human-caused methane, so we should really discuss if dumping prices for meat is the way to go, and thats still ignoring the ethical angle of the meat industry.

      And reducing the amount of car travel needed for daily things like work (WfH as an guaranteed option where possible for example) or groceries (including the fight against food deserts, in which zoning laws have quite an impact) is also something that can be worked towards and would help against climate change.

      Nevertheless, the absolute waste of energy and resources, the excess the rich are living in has to go, or everything else is a moot point.