4 ms·
> Private jets are completely irrelevant to global warming because there are not enough of them. They probably are irrelevant, so why exempt them? > actually
by throwaway894345 5y ago
> Private jets are completely irrelevant to global warming because there are not enough of them.
They probably are irrelevant, so why exempt them?
> actually curbing global warming will require huge changes in the lifestyle of the global middle class. Not just the super-rich.
I'm of the impression that "middle class lifestyle" itself isn't a big contributor to global warming but rather the manufacture and supply chains. If we electrify industry and transport, the bulk of the problem goes away (as I understand it) and the effects on the middle class are pretty transparent apart from choices to fund the transition to clean energy (e.g., to what extent does the middle class pay for the transition rather than the super rich). In other words, the average middle class lifestyle isn't significantly impacted by whether their goods are manufactured, refined, transported, etc with clean energy or dirty energy.
I get the distinct impression that the "middle class lifestyles will change dramatically" is frequently a euphemism for "we must go full-vegan" by people who are anti-meat. But meat production in the US accounts for only 8% of (co2-equivalent) emissions and those emissions are largely methane and nitrous oxide which dissipate quickly relative to co2 (12 years for methane vs 300-1000 years for co2).
- mbesto 5y ago> itself isn't a big contributor to global warming but rather the manufacture and supply chains. Manufacture and supply chains (and services for that matter) that provide to the middle class. At least that's my interpretation of the parent's point.
- throwaway894345 5y agoRight, and my point is that the middleclass lifestyle doesn't care whether those industries/supply-chains are fueled by solar or fossil fuel.
- orwin 5y agoNo, they doesn't care, but "middleclass lifestyle" is only available for a fifth of the world, and the remaining four fifth want to partake to. And they slowly do. The total installed renewable electricity capacity was greater than the totla installed fossil capacity for the first time in 2020. It was not replacing old fossil capacity, it was just added to the mix. And capacity != production, so i guess it's even worse than that.
- throwaway894345 5y agoIt’s even worse than that because we not only need to replace existing electrical energy production but we need to electrify sectors that aren’t electrified at all i.e. heavy industry and transportation.
- mbesto 5y agoYou're right except, they will when the price goes up. I think that's the implication here - middle class would have to adjust their lifestyles to good/services that are no longer cheap.
- throwaway894345 5y agoThat’s the “who pays for it?” political decision I was alluding to in my original post. Besides, today our economy is optimized around the assumption that pollution is free—as we learn to optimize around a carbon constraint, we will find some efficiencies here and there which will reduce the “cost” of sustainability (“cost” is in quotes because pollution is just cooking the books and it’s weird to characterize “not fraud” as a “cost”). Moreover, even if you’re of the persuasion that wealth redistribution doesn’t really work and the costs will still trickle down to the middle class, that’s still better than runaway warming.
- singlow 5y ago> They probably are irrelevant, so why exempt them? Because not exempting them may make it harder to pass the bill?
- throwaway894345 5y agoHonestly how much would this tax even affect the super rich? If you're rich enough to afford a private jet are you really scrutinizing your fuel bill?
- singlow 5y agoA significant portion of the super-rich believe they are super-rich because they scrutinize bills and are thrifty/smart with money. "If only everyone else was as smart with their money they could be as rich as I am..."
- WJW 5y agoInterestingly enough the reverse is true: not being aware about your expenses is a surefire way to make sure you don't get rich. But scrutinizing bills in itself is not sufficient that get rich.
- throwaway894345 5y agoI don't think this is even true. Lots of people get rich on luck, i.e., inheritance or other connections to wealthy people, or else they happened to come into stock (e.g., employed at a startup) that beat the odds significantly. Of course, one has to spend less than he earns to stay rich, but even that doesn't demand scrutinizing one's expenses--one could simply be content or conservative or minimalist.
- orwin 5y agoI'm not aware of my expensive and i'm becoming rich, so i guess it isn't true if you work in tech.
- throwaway894345 5y ago