5 ms·

People have their own interests at heart, and of those they care about (their family, friends, community, city, region, country...). Corporations are intereste

People have their own interests at heart, and of those they care about (their family, friends, community, city, region, country...). Corporations are interested in their bottom line, and keeping their large shareholders happy.

ericmay 5y ago
So what do you do when the interests of the people are driving cars, building highways and suburbs, and buying cheap, disposable plastics instead and other things? Are we regulating "business" or "people" when we ban plastic straws when the people want plastic straws and the business is providing them because we want them? I guess I'm just not sure in this instances I see a meaningful difference. I'm not saying we shouldn't take action and that businesses should be responsible, but it seems like we're saying that we'll just regulate the business and that the people are like somehow hopeless and unable to take action. People can do things like not use plastic bags, turn the A/C off, and buy locally made products that are more expensive (just examples). If you care about your community or country why wouldn't you be doing these things? Maybe people don't care about anything except their bottom line too? Idk. So here's a regulation we could play with - you can't buy any produce that is grown outside of 50 miles of where you live. Now what? Who are we regulating?
- camgunz 5y ago
  I don't think it's super useful to make a distinction here between businesses and people. Regulating people is like: - Don't spoil common resources - Don't commit violence against others - Don't gobble up resources and hoard them for yourself - Don't mislead others These apply to businesses too, and when you think about it, it covers a lot: Plastic bags/straws: spoiling common resources, no one can use them A/C: uses a lot of energy, only use it when you must Buy local: when you factor in externalities like atmospheric carbon production, road construction and maintenance, and human suffering (road accidents, lost wages and political power due to corporate agglomeration and financial draining of communities), it falls under "don't spoil common resources" and "don't gobble up resources". --- But more broadly, I always find the "let's rely on individual action" option odd. Besides much of pollution being industrial and not addressable by individual action, it's also obviously not working. So is your position that we deserve what we get? That seems super unsatisfying to me.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    Keeping in mind I’m always exploring… I think my position is that regulating businesses should probably be done, but they don’t come out of nowhere. They fill demands that people have. So people need to start caring and change their habits, and business will follow suit. Not that business shouldn’t or couldn’t be regulated in tandem, but as a reply to the person who was saying businesses care about their bottom line, but people don’t - I find that to be a bit naive. I don’t see a distinction in “care” here. Plenty of companies do the right thing, even better sometimes on a per-capita basis (if you could compare their employees to another group of people). TBH we are fucked so none of this matters. People think electric cars will save us when cars themselves are the issue. Or that we shouldn’t ban plastic straws because it doesn’t do enough when the whole point is we shouldn’t have single use items (except obvious cases like medicine).
    - camgunz 5y ago
      > Or that we shouldn’t ban plastic straws because it doesn’t do enough when the whole point is we shouldn’t have single use items I think this gets at what I--and maybe you're with me--really think: these problems are cultural. People don't hold businesses accountable, so it's a race to the bottom in all kinds of ways: worker pay, labor conditions, pesticide use, fossil fuel use, carcinogen use, taxes, single use items, etc. etc. etc. And you're right that many businesses do in fact at least try to do the right thing. But if you're like, a florist or some SBO who needs a van or two, can you even buy an EV? Should it really be up to you to push automakers to build EVs to suit your purpose? I find myself of two minds: 1. we're (the US) a democracy and our society should reflect our will--it currently doesn't and that's the problem, whether it's apathy or corruption or whatever. 2. we're a republic because it's unreasonable that every citizen become a change agent; we elect representatives to do that--they currently don't and that's the problem. > TBH we are fucked so none of this matters. Yeah I mean, I hear people on podcasts railing against this kind of fatalism. I get what they're saying, we could in fact take action right now to address the worst parts of climate change. I think it's really, painfully obvious we won't do that though. Humans just aren't wired to deal with this kind of problem. The effects are too abstract and distant. Even in this thread, with people way higher than average intelligence you have people scoffing at climate activists, saying they're demanding the impossible. Totally insane.

ericmay 5y ago

So what do you do when the interests of the people are driving cars, building highways and suburbs, and buying cheap, disposable plastics instead and other things? Are we regulating "business" or "people" when we ban plastic straws when the people want plastic straws and the business is providing them because we want them? I guess I'm just not sure in this instances I see a meaningful difference. I'm not saying we shouldn't take action and that businesses should be responsible, but it seems like we're saying that we'll just regulate the business and that the people are like somehow hopeless and unable to take action. People can do things like not use plastic bags, turn the A/C off, and buy locally made products that are more expensive (just examples). If you care about your community or country why wouldn't you be doing these things? Maybe people don't care about anything except their bottom line too? Idk. So here's a regulation we could play with - you can't buy any produce that is grown outside of 50 miles of where you live. Now what? Who are we regulating?

camgunz 5y ago
I don't think it's super useful to make a distinction here between businesses and people. Regulating people is like: - Don't spoil common resources - Don't commit violence against others - Don't gobble up resources and hoard them for yourself - Don't mislead others These apply to businesses too, and when you think about it, it covers a lot: Plastic bags/straws: spoiling common resources, no one can use them A/C: uses a lot of energy, only use it when you must Buy local: when you factor in externalities like atmospheric carbon production, road construction and maintenance, and human suffering (road accidents, lost wages and political power due to corporate agglomeration and financial draining of communities), it falls under "don't spoil common resources" and "don't gobble up resources". --- But more broadly, I always find the "let's rely on individual action" option odd. Besides much of pollution being industrial and not addressable by individual action, it's also obviously not working. So is your position that we deserve what we get? That seems super unsatisfying to me.
- ericmay 5y ago
  Keeping in mind I’m always exploring… I think my position is that regulating businesses should probably be done, but they don’t come out of nowhere. They fill demands that people have. So people need to start caring and change their habits, and business will follow suit. Not that business shouldn’t or couldn’t be regulated in tandem, but as a reply to the person who was saying businesses care about their bottom line, but people don’t - I find that to be a bit naive. I don’t see a distinction in “care” here. Plenty of companies do the right thing, even better sometimes on a per-capita basis (if you could compare their employees to another group of people). TBH we are fucked so none of this matters. People think electric cars will save us when cars themselves are the issue. Or that we shouldn’t ban plastic straws because it doesn’t do enough when the whole point is we shouldn’t have single use items (except obvious cases like medicine).
  - camgunz 5y ago
    > Or that we shouldn’t ban plastic straws because it doesn’t do enough when the whole point is we shouldn’t have single use items I think this gets at what I--and maybe you're with me--really think: these problems are cultural. People don't hold businesses accountable, so it's a race to the bottom in all kinds of ways: worker pay, labor conditions, pesticide use, fossil fuel use, carcinogen use, taxes, single use items, etc. etc. etc. And you're right that many businesses do in fact at least try to do the right thing. But if you're like, a florist or some SBO who needs a van or two, can you even buy an EV? Should it really be up to you to push automakers to build EVs to suit your purpose? I find myself of two minds: 1. we're (the US) a democracy and our society should reflect our will--it currently doesn't and that's the problem, whether it's apathy or corruption or whatever. 2. we're a republic because it's unreasonable that every citizen become a change agent; we elect representatives to do that--they currently don't and that's the problem. > TBH we are fucked so none of this matters. Yeah I mean, I hear people on podcasts railing against this kind of fatalism. I get what they're saying, we could in fact take action right now to address the worst parts of climate change. I think it's really, painfully obvious we won't do that though. Humans just aren't wired to deal with this kind of problem. The effects are too abstract and distant. Even in this thread, with people way higher than average intelligence you have people scoffing at climate activists, saying they're demanding the impossible. Totally insane.