4 ms·

I kind of agree with all those points? We have to change our behaviour fast, because those with real needs (the poor family trying to eke out a subsistence livi

I kind of agree with all those points? We have to change our behaviour fast, because those with real needs (the poor family trying to eke out a subsistence living in rural india) are going to feel the full brunt of the Co2 we and our neighbours have been spewing out our whole lives. And instead we're congratulating ourselves on building electric status symbols

actusual 4y ago
> And instead we're congratulating ourselves on building electric status symbols Isn't this how you drive change? You have to give people the desire to change before they can actually change...unless you think authoritarianism is a solution (not saying you do, but I'm not sure what other options there are other than 1) give people the opportunity and desire to change, or 2) force them to change). The speed at which we are changing aside...we ARE changing as a society, and that should be celebrated.
avalys 4y ago
Is it our obligation to ensure adequate quality of life for every human on the entire planet? Why stop at improving their lives by reducing our CO2 emissions? Why not institute a 10% income tax on all Americans and send that money and resources to subsistence farmers in rural India? That would surely improve their lives and help their "real needs" even more. How much of your income do you donate to subsistence farmers in rural India? For many people, the answer is "none". Why is there an expectation that we are obligated to improve the lives of subsistence farmers in rural India by reducing our carbon footprint, but not an expectation that we should donate money?
- namdnay 4y ago
  There’s a clear ethical distinction between not actively helping someone and actively harming them. I don’t have to lend my neighbor my lawnmower, but I definitely shouldn’t shit on his grass

4 ms·

I kind of agree with all those points? We have to change our behaviour fast, because those with real needs (the poor family trying to eke out a subsistence livi

by namdnay 4y ago

actusual 4y ago
> And instead we're congratulating ourselves on building electric status symbols Isn't this how you drive change? You have to give people the desire to change before they can actually change...unless you think authoritarianism is a solution (not saying you do, but I'm not sure what other options there are other than 1) give people the opportunity and desire to change, or 2) force them to change). The speed at which we are changing aside...we ARE changing as a society, and that should be celebrated.
avalys 4y ago
Is it our obligation to ensure adequate quality of life for every human on the entire planet? Why stop at improving their lives by reducing our CO2 emissions? Why not institute a 10% income tax on all Americans and send that money and resources to subsistence farmers in rural India? That would surely improve their lives and help their "real needs" even more. How much of your income do you donate to subsistence farmers in rural India? For many people, the answer is "none". Why is there an expectation that we are obligated to improve the lives of subsistence farmers in rural India by reducing our carbon footprint, but not an expectation that we should donate money?
- namdnay 4y ago
  There’s a clear ethical distinction between not actively helping someone and actively harming them. I don’t have to lend my neighbor my lawnmower, but I definitely shouldn’t shit on his grass