6 ms·

Given that it provides mostly luxury services, it's quite easy to get rid of these 2%. Nobody is going to suffer from not being able to take the plane to go on

Given that it provides mostly luxury services, it's quite easy to get rid of these 2%. Nobody is going to suffer from not being able to take the plane to go on a vacation.

logicchains 6y ago
Who are you to know how much other people suffer from not being able to go on vacation?
- luckylion 6y ago
  Maybe qualifying it helps: Nobody is going to reasonably suffer from not being able to take the plane to go on a vacation.
  - rini17 6y ago
    I already know some who did suffer (perhaps unreasonably but that's in the end irrelevant).
    - luckylion 6y ago
      Perhaps "suffer" isn't great here, because it's used coloquially as "being affected" and to literally suffer because of something. People will be affected, absolutely. And some people might also suffer from not being able to have an international vacation. But probably not reasonably so, i.e. a reasonable person would not suffer in that situation. You can suffer unreasonably, and you're right, it's irrelevant to the question of "does suffering exist", but it's very relevant to the question of "should we do something about it as society". If it's reasonable, probably. Otherwise that's between an individual and their therapist.
  - logicchains 6y ago
    >Nobody is going to reasonably suffer Your definition of reasonable is not universal. For many people, life is for living, not for sacrificing worldly pleasures to eke out as long an existence as possible.
    - JohnBooty 6y ago
      This isn't about sacrificing all worldly pleasures or even all vacations. It's about perhaps rethinking whether one needs to fly so often for one's vacations.
  - sct202 6y ago
    A lot of people don't live on the same continent that they were born on and vacations are the only time they get to see their families.
- fogihujy 6y ago
  It's not that air travel will just disappear or anything. Some areas are simply too remote to depend on anything else. However, up until about 8 months ago, there were lots of 15-30 minute flights that could be replaced with videoconferencing and (post-pandemic) train travel. Sure, you still might need to catch a plane if you're going on vacation on the other side of the globe, but you can usuall have that client meeting over Zoom, and if you're going on a trip from one European city to another then train travel is often not a bad option.
  - logicchains 6y ago
    >It's not that air travel will just disappear or anything. The comment I was replying to was implying that recreational air travel should be banned completely.
    - fogihujy 6y ago
      I interpreted it as getting rid off unneccesary air travel. There are multiple ways of achieving such a reduction, but not all would require a ban. A total ban of air travel is, of course, not possible.
- covidSurvivor19 6y ago
  Must be a leftist, they all like centralized authority that will surely know what's best for individual people. In reality, the best chooser for an individual is him/her/self owing to their unique perspective. Not going on vacation may well indeed be suffering.
chii 6y ago
So they drive, or ship instead, and both being worse? or are you asking people to sacrifice their quality of life (i.e., _not_ take a vacation)? Because you know that won't happen.
- jnxx 6y ago
  No, it is not worse, emission by driving or shipping are far lower (emissions by fast ferries are still ridiculously high but not necessary). > or are you asking people to sacrifice their quality of life Get a grip. CO2 emissions are literally about to destroy the habitable planet, including problems with food, wars, wildfires, violent storms, flooding, and on. If you think this is really less important than going on a vacation on another continent, then you need to grow up a bit.
  - logicchains 6y ago
    >CO2 emissions are literally about to destroy the habitable planet, including problems with food, wars, wildfires, violent storms, flooding, and on. This is baseless fearmongering. Even the worst-case sea rise predictions for 2100 would have relatively minimal impact on the lifestyles of most people living in developed countries.
    - wasmitnetzen 6y ago
      Sea rise is only 1/2 point of all the ones the parent listed. Why do you ignore all the others?
    - electricviolet 6y ago
      Why do you only care about the lifestyles of people living in developed countries? Also, even if we decide that we don't care about 4/5 of the world, increased flooding and wildfires are already affecting hundreds of thousands of people each year in North America.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
  You don't have to take a flight or drive your own car to take a vacation. I've been spending all my holidays in Greece in the last 10 years or so and I've taken a flight there maybe one or twice (and once was to attend a funeral when time was pressing). Otherwise I travel by land and sea, train and boat, no cars or planes whatsoever. I live in the UK, so it's a two- or three-days journey if you do it head-over-heels but it can take a lot longer if done at a leisure (which I usually do). I spend time visiting towns and cities in France and Italy that are out of my way, and still do that without driving. In any case, taking a holiday or going abroad doesn't mean taking a flight, or driving. And I really doubt that taking a boat trip produces more CO₂ per capita than taking a flight, given that many more people will typically board a ferry boat, than board an airliner going the same distance.
thedrbrian 6y ago
What a depressing future you envision.
- abyssin 6y ago
  Climate change sure isn't going to be fun, whether we manage to stay under the 2 °C target or not. But I don't think we should spend too much time lamenting about it. Instead, we can find ways to lower our CO2 emissions, even if it means lowering our luxurious standards of living – flying is a luxury.
- fulafel 6y ago
  If reducing air travel seems a depressing consequence of the climate crisis, it's going to get way more depressing. This is a good tradeoff to mitigate much worse things.
KSteffensen 6y ago
Which is what the epidemic is highlighting and why the industry is so worried.
ThePadawan 6y ago
How much of the aviation industry is cargo vs passengers anyway?

Given that it provides mostly luxury services, it's quite easy to get rid of these 2%. Nobody is going to suffer from not being able to take the plane to go on a vacation.

logicchains 6y ago

Who are you to know how much other people suffer from not being able to go on vacation?

luckylion 6y ago
Maybe qualifying it helps: Nobody is going to reasonably suffer from not being able to take the plane to go on a vacation.
- rini17 6y ago
  I already know some who did suffer (perhaps unreasonably but that's in the end irrelevant).
  - luckylion 6y ago
    Perhaps "suffer" isn't great here, because it's used coloquially as "being affected" and to literally suffer because of something. People will be affected, absolutely. And some people might also suffer from not being able to have an international vacation. But probably not reasonably so, i.e. a reasonable person would not suffer in that situation. You can suffer unreasonably, and you're right, it's irrelevant to the question of "does suffering exist", but it's very relevant to the question of "should we do something about it as society". If it's reasonable, probably. Otherwise that's between an individual and their therapist.
- logicchains 6y ago
  >Nobody is going to reasonably suffer Your definition of reasonable is not universal. For many people, life is for living, not for sacrificing worldly pleasures to eke out as long an existence as possible.
  - JohnBooty 6y ago
    This isn't about sacrificing all worldly pleasures or even all vacations. It's about perhaps rethinking whether one needs to fly so often for one's vacations.
- sct202 6y ago
  A lot of people don't live on the same continent that they were born on and vacations are the only time they get to see their families.
fogihujy 6y ago
It's not that air travel will just disappear or anything. Some areas are simply too remote to depend on anything else. However, up until about 8 months ago, there were lots of 15-30 minute flights that could be replaced with videoconferencing and (post-pandemic) train travel. Sure, you still might need to catch a plane if you're going on vacation on the other side of the globe, but you can usuall have that client meeting over Zoom, and if you're going on a trip from one European city to another then train travel is often not a bad option.
- logicchains 6y ago
  >It's not that air travel will just disappear or anything. The comment I was replying to was implying that recreational air travel should be banned completely.
  - fogihujy 6y ago
    I interpreted it as getting rid off unneccesary air travel. There are multiple ways of achieving such a reduction, but not all would require a ban. A total ban of air travel is, of course, not possible.
covidSurvivor19 6y ago
Must be a leftist, they all like centralized authority that will surely know what's best for individual people. In reality, the best chooser for an individual is him/her/self owing to their unique perspective. Not going on vacation may well indeed be suffering.

chii 6y ago

So they drive, or ship instead, and both being worse? or are you asking people to sacrifice their quality of life (i.e., _not_ take a vacation)? Because you know that won't happen.

jnxx 6y ago
No, it is not worse, emission by driving or shipping are far lower (emissions by fast ferries are still ridiculously high but not necessary). > or are you asking people to sacrifice their quality of life Get a grip. CO2 emissions are literally about to destroy the habitable planet, including problems with food, wars, wildfires, violent storms, flooding, and on. If you think this is really less important than going on a vacation on another continent, then you need to grow up a bit.
- logicchains 6y ago
  >CO2 emissions are literally about to destroy the habitable planet, including problems with food, wars, wildfires, violent storms, flooding, and on. This is baseless fearmongering. Even the worst-case sea rise predictions for 2100 would have relatively minimal impact on the lifestyles of most people living in developed countries.
  - wasmitnetzen 6y ago
    Sea rise is only 1/2 point of all the ones the parent listed. Why do you ignore all the others?
  - electricviolet 6y ago
    Why do you only care about the lifestyles of people living in developed countries? Also, even if we decide that we don't care about 4/5 of the world, increased flooding and wildfires are already affecting hundreds of thousands of people each year in North America.
YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
You don't have to take a flight or drive your own car to take a vacation. I've been spending all my holidays in Greece in the last 10 years or so and I've taken a flight there maybe one or twice (and once was to attend a funeral when time was pressing). Otherwise I travel by land and sea, train and boat, no cars or planes whatsoever. I live in the UK, so it's a two- or three-days journey if you do it head-over-heels but it can take a lot longer if done at a leisure (which I usually do). I spend time visiting towns and cities in France and Italy that are out of my way, and still do that without driving. In any case, taking a holiday or going abroad doesn't mean taking a flight, or driving. And I really doubt that taking a boat trip produces more CO₂ per capita than taking a flight, given that many more people will typically board a ferry boat, than board an airliner going the same distance.

thedrbrian 6y ago

What a depressing future you envision.

abyssin 6y ago
Climate change sure isn't going to be fun, whether we manage to stay under the 2 °C target or not. But I don't think we should spend too much time lamenting about it. Instead, we can find ways to lower our CO2 emissions, even if it means lowering our luxurious standards of living – flying is a luxury.
fulafel 6y ago
If reducing air travel seems a depressing consequence of the climate crisis, it's going to get way more depressing. This is a good tradeoff to mitigate much worse things.

KSteffensen 6y ago

Which is what the epidemic is highlighting and why the industry is so worried.

ThePadawan 6y ago

How much of the aviation industry is cargo vs passengers anyway?