Billionaires Are the One Case Where Personal Choices Can Affect Climate Change
Posted by MaffeoPolo@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 38 comments
publicdefecation@reddit
>The report, first spotted by The Register, looked at the carbon output of the private jets, superyachts, and investments of the world’s 50 richest billionaires and compared it to what the rest of us are doing.
So if I'm understanding this correctly, this means that because Elon Musk owns something like 20% of Tesla which means that 20% of all emissions from all of Tesla's factories are attributed to him.
That sort of makes sense, but wouldn't it make more sense if the emissions of Tesla's factories be attributed to Tesla's customers (ie the owner of Tesla cars) instead? Afterall, if I drive a car than my personal carbon footprint would include the emissions from the car itself plus the emissions required to produce (ie the factory) and deliver the car to me, right?
agentchuck@reddit
Yeah, there has been this backlash against personal carbon footprint that kind of went too far. People now seem to want to attribute all climate change to corporations or places like India and China, while ignoring that those things only exist to pollute because we're buying their crap.
There's a middle ground here where it makes sense to demand better choices and accountability from these giants. But also we need to accept we're still the grass roots driving a lot of this.
ahappydayinlalaland@reddit
We're buying their crap because they spend billions advertising it to us in every possible way.
Soonhun@reddit
And it costs us nothing to ignore the advertisements.
dood9123@reddit
This just isn't true You can't ignore their effect on you
apistograma@reddit
Much of the environmental footprint is virtually impossible to avoid if you want to be part of society. You need electricity, water, transportation, a phone, food...
Honestly I wonder how much of all pollution comes from unnecessary splurges.
worldm21@reddit
Informed consumer choice still exists, endangered as it is.
equivocalConnotation@reddit
I don't see how it does...
Imagine if the government nationalized Tesla. It would still have the exact same emissions...
The issue is people wanting cars, not any particular person (or company's) supplying of said cars.
worldm21@reddit
It's really a judgment call where you draw the line there. Neither thing exists without the other. Consumers make polluting choices, companies make polluting choices. Governments (especially militaries) also subsidize polluting choices.
gummytoejam@reddit
Tesla Is making the cars before they're sold. Not sure how you can place blame on the nonexistent customer for production emissions.
eightNote@reddit
The environmental cost should be put into the cost of the car, either by higher prices or by taxes. While Elon isn't charging Tesla buyers for environmental cleanup, he's taking that cost on by himself as a shareholder.
It's his responsibility how his factories work, not his customers
Timbo1994@reddit
Agree, and there's also the question whether Tesla/its customers should get credit for moving away from traditional vehicles.
It feels like they should, otherwise its immoral to start a business/buy a product that improves emissions unless you reduce them to zero.
No_Lion_2533@reddit
There’s probably a kernel of truth there but Oxfam have a horrendous habit of flatting arguments and leaving out details that would undercut their arguments. 10% of the worlds population is 800 million people responsible for 50% which still includes most middle class people in the western hemisphere + a decent number of Chinese people.
Billionaires use a huge amount of energy relative to normal people but they are still a drop in the bucket - equal to a few hundred thousands people at most. The fact that the 1% ( still 80 million people +) use more than the bottom 66% is more indicative of how little the bottom use. These reports like to make you think that the 10% or the 1% are some far away group when in reality most people reading these reports fall firmly within this categories. So collective action is still required of these groups
JayBebop1@reddit
This raise question what do we tell all those poor people ? Sorry our western lifestyle is out of order ? Please seek a different way of life. Don’t do like us
eightNote@reddit
China is making solar electricity really cheap, and making electric based transportation really cheap.
Build out a good lifestyle that uses a different energy source
PatrollinTheMojave@reddit
China is making solar electricity really cheap... using rare earth metals harvested in a neoimperialist scheme using Uyghur slaves. ["Good lifestyle"](https://www.antislavery.org/reports/uyghur-forced-labour-green-technology/)
Bright_Captain7320@reddit
Cheap where? One solar panel of a decent size is gonna cost you an arm here.
No_Lion_2533@reddit
I mean they’re so cheap in the Netherlands people are installing them as fences
MonitorPowerful5461@reddit
This gives China a lot more credit than they deserve. They’ve been on a massive coal-power-plant building spree for ages.
magkruppe@reddit
let's take a look at historical emissions and decide how much credit we should give them. they'll come out looking rosier than most of the world
yes they build coal, but they are a developing country that still has growing energy needs. hundreds of millions are still in poverty
MonitorPowerful5461@reddit
This gives China a lot more credit than they deserve. They’ve been on a massive coal-power-plant building spree for ages.
Death_Trolley@reddit
If you read the actual study, most of the included emissions are from investments. So, if a billionaire owns an oil company, all carbon from all the oil produced is counted against him. Following that logic, it’s on their shoulders that they don’t just turn off production tomorrow and leave the world without oil supply. That would fix things.
Background-File-1901@reddit
They dont make oil for fun. Its made for consumers
No_Lion_2533@reddit
Yeah I’ve read it previously - it’s the same logic that blames a handful of large companies for 70% of global emissions because they use scope 3 emissions as their measure and therefore giving a free pass to everyone else involved in the supply/consumption chain
HoFattoScaloAGrado@reddit
This article is wrong, based on a condescending view of the majority of humanity as a pathetically impotent mass.
The power of the working class creates the wealth of the billionaire. The working class must refuse to continue in this role.
Our personal choice: increased risk of instability now (by striking/checking out) in an already outrageously unstable economy, or a likely broiling death some years down the line as a result of the current economic order going uninterrupted.
FrogotBoy@reddit
All billionaires belong in work camps and their will never be any exceptions to this rule. It’s time we stopped letting kings and queens exist in the modern age and stopped letting the entire gears of our economies and the blood, sweat and tears of all working people go to a few people who do nothing and use most of their money to poison our minds, bodies and planet to protect their privilege.
OmgBsitka@reddit
Yup, but how will they fly 1000s or miles to their environmental meeting s every month and talk about the average joe who drives their car 10miles to work and back and hownits causing mass climate change e.e
YZYSZN1107@reddit
Billionaires shouldn't be a thing IMO but them jetting around the world in no way affects global warming as a whole. We still have factories and processing (oil) plants around the world that spew so much into the atmosphere that are doing the real damage. Some ultra rich guy taking his jet from NY to London for brunch does nothing in the grand scheme.
worldm21@reddit
"Much lower" is not the same thing as "zero". You take every non-billionaire's personal choices and sum them together, you're telling me that's not a single/double digit percent of global warming?
Yes, billionaires are dramatically overrepresented. That doesn't mean everyone else has no effect.
classic4life@reddit
There are a lot of policy options for reigning in their carbon footprint. Massive taxes on mega mansions, private jets would be a nice start.
Like 30% of assessed value annually for properties worth over 5 million. (arbitrary number don't fixate on it too much)
And make sure that tax is used specifically to help pay for sustainable transitions everywhere else in the economy.
Yautja93@reddit
Sure, and the actors, politicians and famous people who use jets line we use buses? Stop being a hypocrite and own it up, YOUR actors, YOUR politicians and YOUR famous people are the problems, not only the billionaires, ffs, you guys only want A scapegoat.
Particular_Belt4028@reddit
It's much easier to blame billionaires than to admit and try to curb our own actions in advancing climate change, isn't it? And are they seriously attributing an entire company's emissions to one person? We should be taking steps to stop our own emissions than just pushing the blame onto billionaires.
juiceboxheero@reddit
Oh come on. Yes an individual billionaire's actions are far more impactful than an average citizen, but let's cut this prisoner's dilemma bullshit and come to terms that we collectively consume too much, and we could make choices en masse, like reducing meat consumption, that would have impactful change on the climate crisis
MaffeoPolo@reddit (OP)
People are bad at taking responsibility for their own actions but find blaming others easy. Such rhetoric will always have takers. Rather than fixing climate change we will spend the next decade pointing fingers at each other.
eightNote@reddit
Yeah there's no need for personal choice to be involved. Just ban private jets and superyachts.
TearOpenTheVault@reddit
Note the 'personal choice,' which I suppose is standing in for 'individual choice' here. A single WalMart employee buying less meat does almost nothing on a grand scale to reduce emissions, while the Waltons just... Not using one of their superyachts would effectively erase dozens of people's carbon footprints. The average Joe would need to be part of a sweeping movement to reduce consumption to contribute the same as a single one of the megarich.
empleadoEstatalBot@reddit
Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
coverageanalysisbot@reddit
Hi empleadoEstatalBot,
We've found 2 sources (so far) that are covering this story including:
So far, there hasn't been any coverage from the CENTER.
Of all the sources reporting on this story, 100% are left-leaning, 0% are right-leaning, and 0% are in the center. Read the full coverage analysis and compare how 2+ sources from across the political spectrum are covering this story.
I’m a bot. Read here to learn how it works or message us with any feedback so we can improve the bot for you.