3 ms·

I'm aware this is somewhat besides the point. But still .. The way I see it, carefully choosing a job doesn't matter much (compared to other things you can do)

by ephbit 4y ago

I'm aware this is somewhat besides the point. But still .. The way I see it, carefully choosing a job doesn't matter much (compared to other things you can do) for helping avoid the ecosphere catastrophe as an individual. Most jobs are the end result of consumers (and also institutions like the state or other companies) demanding whatever products and services they deem necessary. Companies then implement processes to produce these things and then issue job offers accordingly and employ personnel. If some job vacancy provides enough salary, it will very likely be filled. By you or someone else. By choosing to not do a certain job, you don't influence the demand side for it (which comes from consumers' demand) and if the demand is high, in principle the salary will generally just increase until someone else is willing to do the job. If you want to gently yet effectively change and shape the whole supply chain and reduce emissions, you can choose to be very conscious of your individual demands that you feed into the worldwide production system. If you simply buy less unnecessary stuff (right now the best thing you can do) or buy used stuff or buy sustainable stuff ... and if billions of people do the same, we will have a totally different landscape of companies within 20 years. Living daily life as sustainably as possible, is - in our current western environment - a real challenge. Some people find meaning in trying to accomplish that. IMO there's nothing wrong with working in a job that's not per se sustainable (say oil rig) and at the same time living your daily life in such a way that shapes your little individual slice of the world wide demand for production so that it's sustainable.

ephbit 4y ago
You can even invert and distort the example in my last paragraph to the extreme and ask yourself which (A or B) will more likely lead to a better outcome for the ecosphere. A) You work as a consultant for a company that advises other companies how to save energy in their processes. You make good money and use your ample holiday of 50 days a year travelling the world by flying here and there with your family. B) You work on an oil rig and recently bought a small house in the outskirts of a small town. You're mostly vegetarian and in your holidays you're either working on renovating the house to be selfsufficient (top insulation, solar panels, electrolyzer, H2-tank, fuel-cell, rain water tank, ...) or you're doing bike trips with a tent.
- crypt1d 4y ago
  How about a C) You work for a company that is trying to solve climate change, and at the same time in your personal life focus on decreasing your carbon footprint? There is no reason why one cannot do both, if they want to. You'd think people that are conscious enough to seek out a climate-relevant job such as OP would also be conscious enough to care about their individual impact to climate change).
  - ephbit 4y ago
    > There is no reason why one cannot do both, ... I want to agree but I think this is not completely true. People's mental capacity to consciously decide what little things they do in daily life and how they do them is a limited ressource. If you agree with me that shaping the demand side (what products/services you demand as a consumer) is more effective than trying to starve the labour market of non-green sectors by not working for them ... then you should prioritize having an eye on consumption. > You'd think people that are conscious enough to seek out a climate-relevant job such as OP would also be conscious enough to care about their individual impact to climate change. There are certainly people who manage to do both. But there are also people who don't. I just think it's really important to make it clear which of the two is more important/useful .. so that people waste less time with the less important/useful aspect .. and to me it's obvious that changing the little things of daily life is far more important/useful.

by ephbit 4y ago

ephbit 4y ago

You can even invert and distort the example in my last paragraph to the extreme and ask yourself which (A or B) will more likely lead to a better outcome for the ecosphere. A) You work as a consultant for a company that advises other companies how to save energy in their processes. You make good money and use your ample holiday of 50 days a year travelling the world by flying here and there with your family. B) You work on an oil rig and recently bought a small house in the outskirts of a small town. You're mostly vegetarian and in your holidays you're either working on renovating the house to be selfsufficient (top insulation, solar panels, electrolyzer, H2-tank, fuel-cell, rain water tank, ...) or you're doing bike trips with a tent.

crypt1d 4y ago
How about a C) You work for a company that is trying to solve climate change, and at the same time in your personal life focus on decreasing your carbon footprint? There is no reason why one cannot do both, if they want to. You'd think people that are conscious enough to seek out a climate-relevant job such as OP would also be conscious enough to care about their individual impact to climate change).
- ephbit 4y ago
  > There is no reason why one cannot do both, ... I want to agree but I think this is not completely true. People's mental capacity to consciously decide what little things they do in daily life and how they do them is a limited ressource. If you agree with me that shaping the demand side (what products/services you demand as a consumer) is more effective than trying to starve the labour market of non-green sectors by not working for them ... then you should prioritize having an eye on consumption. > You'd think people that are conscious enough to seek out a climate-relevant job such as OP would also be conscious enough to care about their individual impact to climate change. There are certainly people who manage to do both. But there are also people who don't. I just think it's really important to make it clear which of the two is more important/useful .. so that people waste less time with the less important/useful aspect .. and to me it's obvious that changing the little things of daily life is far more important/useful.