7 ms·

If someone feels like making what they see as a positive impact by making a lifestyle choice. What's the point in saying: "But you do some unrelated thing???"

by Jonnax 6y ago

If someone feels like making what they see as a positive impact by making a lifestyle choice. What's the point in saying: "But you do some unrelated thing???" Is the argument that there's no point in making a small difference, it's only worth it if you're 100% ideologically pure? Because I don't see where road deaths and microplastics in local rivers come into owning a computer.

azinman2 6y ago
Computers themselves are a hodgepodge of resources extracted often horrendously from all over the world. Child labor for cobalt, various other rare earth products violently extracted with extreme acids scalding lands and polluting water sources, consuming vast quantities of oil to ship all these raw materials to then be assembled in massive factories with poorly paid workers, using terrible chemicals that can poison the workers and harm their babies… The reality is almost all of modern technology, materials, tools, and life have huge externalities. Us being alive consuming resources and emitting green house gases further pushes us towards terrible climate changes, while taking away space from nature before us. It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. Perhaps the OP also has many other resists to modern life under ethical guise. The computer is the one known exception here.
- Jonnax 6y ago
  It isn't a gotcha to say they own a computer. Making a choice not to buy a car makes a measurable impact. It's not a gotcha to say that they partake in society. By your logic, it'd be arbitrary to safely dispose of motor oil instead of conveniently dumping it into the local park's pond.
- imtringued 6y ago
  >It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. Yes, it's incredibly arbitrary because cars don't suffer from low density development patterns. They don't cause pollution. They also don't cost a significant amount of money and this also doesn't force less well off people to get expensive leases because everyone buys low end cars. The tax burden of suburbia is absolutely insignificant. The fact that you have more roads per resident decreases the tax burden significantly. Their only fatal flaw is that new developments aren't funded by the federal government and private developers. Thanks to cars and suburbia municipalities are swimming in cash and never have to worry about their finances. We should ban bicycles and pedestrian paths. Everyone should drive, even children. This is the future.
- bildung 6y ago
  > It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. It stops feeling like that once you replace assumptions with numbers.

by Jonnax 6y ago

azinman2 6y ago

Computers themselves are a hodgepodge of resources extracted often horrendously from all over the world. Child labor for cobalt, various other rare earth products violently extracted with extreme acids scalding lands and polluting water sources, consuming vast quantities of oil to ship all these raw materials to then be assembled in massive factories with poorly paid workers, using terrible chemicals that can poison the workers and harm their babies… The reality is almost all of modern technology, materials, tools, and life have huge externalities. Us being alive consuming resources and emitting green house gases further pushes us towards terrible climate changes, while taking away space from nature before us. It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. Perhaps the OP also has many other resists to modern life under ethical guise. The computer is the one known exception here.

Jonnax 6y ago
It isn't a gotcha to say they own a computer. Making a choice not to buy a car makes a measurable impact. It's not a gotcha to say that they partake in society. By your logic, it'd be arbitrary to safely dispose of motor oil instead of conveniently dumping it into the local park's pond.
imtringued 6y ago
>It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. Yes, it's incredibly arbitrary because cars don't suffer from low density development patterns. They don't cause pollution. They also don't cost a significant amount of money and this also doesn't force less well off people to get expensive leases because everyone buys low end cars. The tax burden of suburbia is absolutely insignificant. The fact that you have more roads per resident decreases the tax burden significantly. Their only fatal flaw is that new developments aren't funded by the federal government and private developers. Thanks to cars and suburbia municipalities are swimming in cash and never have to worry about their finances. We should ban bicycles and pedestrian paths. Everyone should drive, even children. This is the future.
bildung 6y ago
> It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car ownership but maintain the benefits of all other externalities. It stops feeling like that once you replace assumptions with numbers.