• Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    That isn’t always the case though. Just look at climate scientists.

    Some just want to ban smoking because they see how much damage it has done in their community.

    But I’d also like to know if there was any vested interests.

    • Guntrigger@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure what this has to do with climate scientists. What am I supposed to be looking at?

      Rishi has a history of making legislation to benefit the companies run or owned by friends and family. I would be extremely surprised if this didn’t also have a similar angle.

      • ours@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just some good old “whataboutism”. Maybe he sprinkles some climate-change denial into some prohibition discussion to distract us?

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Climate activists want to, among other things, pass extremely unpopular carbon taxes as they’re the most serious effort toward cutting fossil fuels usage

        Extremely unpopular ideas that inevitably favor certain products are not always moves to sell those products, is the point

        It’s pretty reasonable to assume no one outside the UK knows much about Sunak’s history with handouts to friends.

            • HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              People who don’t understand we need to break our addiction to petroleum based fuel. Also People who make money off of petroleum based products.

            • Spzi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s a matter of proper implementation. Tax & dividend! Distribute the tax revenue to the population per capita.

              That means:

              • If your emissions are average, you pay/earn net zero.
              • If you emit more than average, you pay. This will affect mostly rich people, since emissions strongly correlate with available money.
              • If you emit less than average, you net earn. This effectively rewards people with money gained for emissions prevented.

              Since money is distributed unequally in society, this means most people will have to pay less in such a system.

              The beautiful thing is, the financial incentive to emit less remains even for people who gain more than they pay. It’s also an incentive both for buyers and sellers, researchers and investors.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s Rishi Sunak. Of course he has a financial interest somewhere.

      It won’t work, though. Hell. He might be getting paid off by big Tabacco- make smoking edgy and rebellious again so more kids start up.

      It’s the kind of thing those ghouls would try.

    • Lazylazycat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Rishi Sunak also just promised to ensure cars will be able to drive through heavily populated areas indefinitely and has pushed back plans to introduce electric-only cars. He absolutely does not care about peoples’ health.