• Bye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is why I don’t believe people when they say “we don’t have an overpopulation problem, we have a distribution problem”

    Because if everyone in the world had my lifestyle, we would be emitting an insane amount of carbon. And I don’t want my standard of living to go down, and in fact I want everyone to live as nicely as I do. So clearly we need fewer people.

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The overpopulation isn’t happening in the 1%.

      It makes jack shit of a difference to the environment if there is one billion or two billion starving people. They’re not the ones burning carbon or eating steak.

      • Syrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        But we want to stop those people from starving. And if we ideally lived in a world where no one is starving, emissions would go up astronomically.

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s bullshit of a report. If you read it, you will quickly learn how they calculate emissions from the rich. They include things like owning company shares and having influence over the media. So if Bezos owns a major stake in Amazon, he is automatically responsible for all Amazon emissions. And if his PR team publishes some stuff to FB, he’s now responsoble for emissions of Facebook servers. That’s utter bullshit.

    If you buy from Amazon, it’s YOU who are responsoble for all associated emissions like delivery, manufacturing, etc, not Bezos. This report also doesn’t take into account that better off people usually live in well-insulated homes, drive more efficient cars and eat better organic food, thus reducing their footprint further.

    This report also mentions yachts and private jets a lot, but don’t forget that ALL airtraffic accounts only for 2% of all emissions and private jets are a drop in the ocean.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      eat better organic food

      A slight nit-pick here, but when it comes to greenhouse gas impact, organic food may be worse. It’s certainly not clearly better.

      • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Almost definitely worse lol. We have the option to modify the genome of the plants we eat in order to make then better in every way and still some people are like “no that’s icky because science”.