3 ms·
Seems a little extreme if our goal is just to get more people using public transportation.
by throwmeaway_pls 6y ago
Seems a little extreme if our goal is just to get more people using public transportation.
- adrianN 6y agoOur goal is mitigating catastrophic climate change. Making cities more livable is just a nice side effect.
- throwaway1777 6y agoIn that case I guess the best option is more lockdowns, or even better reduce the population through any means necessary. /sarcasm
- lotsofpulp 6y agoI don’t see the sarcasm. Reducing fossil fuel usage can be accomplished in part by reducing the number of people consuming fossil fuels, as well as reducing fossil fuel use per person (which means less traveling/consumption).
- 8note 6y agoMost people that would be removed by population control measures will have negligible impacts on the carbon emissions though. If you cherry pick rich Americans, Canadians, Australians and Saudis you might do well
- adrianN 6y agoNo, more lockdown does exactly nothing to get us off our dependence on fossil fuel. On the contrary, wrecking the economy makes the changes needed less affordable. Reducing population also only buys time. I think you already know both of these things.
- scoopertrooper 6y agoAmerica already has a welfare state (of sorts), it's not like they're talking about abolishing private property in order get more people on to buses.