9 ms·

> I feel like stratospheric aerosol injection would have some crazy unintended side effects. Yeah, but the alternative is lower profits for entrenched corporat

> I feel like stratospheric aerosol injection would have some crazy unintended side effects. Yeah, but the alternative is lower profits for entrenched corporate powers, so ... In all seriousness, though, I'm glad someone is considering all options, because the political reality of this planet is that the common-sense approach may very well be off the table, meaning a moonshot is all we'll have left.

faangiq 4y ago
> Yeah, but the alternative is lower profits for entrenched corporate powers, so ... Can’t we just pay these people enough to go away?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- arealaccount 4y ago
  Not really possible since the share holders will always want an ROI
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- wnolens 4y ago
  And then the solution to global warming is close to just being literally money https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Cure_for_AIDS https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Cure_for_AIDS
- autoexec 4y ago
  These people already have more money than they could ever spend in their lifetimes. We could never pay them enough because the problem with them is that they have no concept of "enough". Their greed is insatiable and they don't care who or how many get hurt as long as they get even a little more wealth and power.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- ianai 4y ago
  I wish there were like a “we get it. You won at scarce resource creation/allocation. Here’s your $Buckillion award and you never have to worry about bills again.” Maybe we give them a national audience ala a state of the union address once in five years and a bill with a straight up/down.
- kortilla 4y ago
  > Can’t we just pay these people enough to go away? “These people” is most of the population. Look at how little people have done to reduce their own meat reduction, transportation usage, etc. People claim they care about global warming but air travel is back in full force and US citizens are throwing shit fits about petrol prices being a little closer to other western countries. There is no corporate evil cabal keeping CO2 emissions high. It’s what the population actually wants through revealed preferences despite their expressed preferences.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    It’s a little bit of both: incentive structures are both established and strengthened by profit interests.
    - parineum 4y ago
      It's not a little bit of both. "Greedy corporations" don't create demand or consumption. Corporations want your money so they make things you want. They don't just pump CO2 into the atmosphere for fun.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        I didn't say "greedy." But yes, corporations do induce demand: that's the entire point of advertising, and so many other mainstays of 21st century capitalism: planned obsolescence, vendor lock-in, and so forth. Consumers do not want to buy a new phone, computer, fridge, &c. every X years; they do it because it's the local maxima between short-term purchasing power and corporate profits. Nobody pumps CO2 into the atmosphere "for fun," besides a very small group of men with illegally modified trucks. But corporations do pump CO2 into the atmosphere (taken as a general metaphor for pollution) because it's an efficient method of externalization.
        parineum 4y ago
        Without advertising, how would you know the things you want exist? Why do you remove all agency and responsibility from consumers and place it on corporations? Does it have anything to do with which one you're a part of?
- pasquinelli 4y ago
  pay off the fossil feul industry? i don't know how you intend to do that.
- tjpnz 4y ago
  Last I heard John Galt and Co were making plans to leave for Mars.
darth_avocado 4y ago
How about everyone in the world consume as less per capita as some of the poorest countries on the planet instead of poisoning everyone? Any negative consequences, if any, will automatically put more burden on the poorer countries that don’t have the resources to fix things when they go wrong. All options should not be considered imho.
- theplumber 4y ago
  I think technology is the solution not cave living conditions. Nobody will signup for poverty.
  - michaelchisari 4y ago
    Why assume the only alternative to American overconsumption is a a primitive existence?
    - serf 4y ago
      > Why assume the only alternative to American overconsumption is a a primitive existence? did I fall asleep in class when they mentioned that it was the American pollution that was particularly bad for the world? if blame-pointing is the primary concern here, doesn't China produce something like double the amount of CO2 emissions compared to the US?
      - bigfudge 4y ago
        >doesn't China produce something like double the amount of CO2 emissions compared to the US? Certainly not per capita. And China and other developing countries have been emitting large amounts of co2 for only a very short period relatively speaking. We have gained the benefits of industrialisation but other poorer nations are beating the costs. This is why American and European pollution is different and must be addressed as a priority.
        marginalia_nu 4y ago

faangiq 4y ago

> Yeah, but the alternative is lower profits for entrenched corporate powers, so ... Can’t we just pay these people enough to go away?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
arealaccount 4y ago
Not really possible since the share holders will always want an ROI
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
wnolens 4y ago
And then the solution to global warming is close to just being literally money https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Cure_for_AIDS https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Cure_for_AIDS
autoexec 4y ago
These people already have more money than they could ever spend in their lifetimes. We could never pay them enough because the problem with them is that they have no concept of "enough". Their greed is insatiable and they don't care who or how many get hurt as long as they get even a little more wealth and power.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ianai 4y ago
I wish there were like a “we get it. You won at scarce resource creation/allocation. Here’s your $Buckillion award and you never have to worry about bills again.” Maybe we give them a national audience ala a state of the union address once in five years and a bill with a straight up/down.
kortilla 4y ago
> Can’t we just pay these people enough to go away? “These people” is most of the population. Look at how little people have done to reduce their own meat reduction, transportation usage, etc. People claim they care about global warming but air travel is back in full force and US citizens are throwing shit fits about petrol prices being a little closer to other western countries. There is no corporate evil cabal keeping CO2 emissions high. It’s what the population actually wants through revealed preferences despite their expressed preferences.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  It’s a little bit of both: incentive structures are both established and strengthened by profit interests.
  - parineum 4y ago
    It's not a little bit of both. "Greedy corporations" don't create demand or consumption. Corporations want your money so they make things you want. They don't just pump CO2 into the atmosphere for fun.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      I didn't say "greedy." But yes, corporations do induce demand: that's the entire point of advertising, and so many other mainstays of 21st century capitalism: planned obsolescence, vendor lock-in, and so forth. Consumers do not want to buy a new phone, computer, fridge, &c. every X years; they do it because it's the local maxima between short-term purchasing power and corporate profits. Nobody pumps CO2 into the atmosphere "for fun," besides a very small group of men with illegally modified trucks. But corporations do pump CO2 into the atmosphere (taken as a general metaphor for pollution) because it's an efficient method of externalization.
      - parineum 4y ago
        Without advertising, how would you know the things you want exist? Why do you remove all agency and responsibility from consumers and place it on corporations? Does it have anything to do with which one you're a part of?
pasquinelli 4y ago
pay off the fossil feul industry? i don't know how you intend to do that.
tjpnz 4y ago
Last I heard John Galt and Co were making plans to leave for Mars.

darth_avocado 4y ago

How about everyone in the world consume as less per capita as some of the poorest countries on the planet instead of poisoning everyone? Any negative consequences, if any, will automatically put more burden on the poorer countries that don’t have the resources to fix things when they go wrong. All options should not be considered imho.

theplumber 4y ago
I think technology is the solution not cave living conditions. Nobody will signup for poverty.
- michaelchisari 4y ago
  Why assume the only alternative to American overconsumption is a a primitive existence?
  - serf 4y ago
    > Why assume the only alternative to American overconsumption is a a primitive existence? did I fall asleep in class when they mentioned that it was the American pollution that was particularly bad for the world? if blame-pointing is the primary concern here, doesn't China produce something like double the amount of CO2 emissions compared to the US?
    - bigfudge 4y ago
      >doesn't China produce something like double the amount of CO2 emissions compared to the US? Certainly not per capita. And China and other developing countries have been emitting large amounts of co2 for only a very short period relatively speaking. We have gained the benefits of industrialisation but other poorer nations are beating the costs. This is why American and European pollution is different and must be addressed as a priority.
      - marginalia_nu 4y ago