4 ms·
There's absolutely no carbon footprint in luxury spending, because luxury goods are by definition very high-markup. Every buck spent on a Birkin handbag saves t
by anovikov 6y ago
There's absolutely no carbon footprint in luxury spending, because luxury goods are by definition very high-markup. Every buck spent on a Birkin handbag saves that amount from being spent on a gas-guzzling SUV, or more realistically, considering the target group, from being spent on a couple of private jet flights that would emit tens of tons of CO2.
If anything, luxury spending must be promoted to reduce carbon intensity of national economies.
- imwillofficial 6y agoThis is a hilarious take. I love it
- JohnJamesRambo 6y agoPoe’s Law rearing its head on HN again.
- tim333 6y agoOf course it depends which luxury spending. A buy a Van Gogh, not a megayacht campaign might help.
- anovikov 6y agoThis is correct, but any luxury spending is still better than non-luxury for the same amount. Private jets are probably the worst, and even them are much better per dollar spent than non-luxury equivalent: cost of fuel makes a much smaller fraction of trip costs than with airlines.