4 ms·

It's because they're unaware and need to be made aware. Rich folks focus on certain things like reusable straws or driving a Tesla and think they're doing the

It's because they're unaware and need to be made aware. Rich folks focus on certain things like reusable straws or driving a Tesla and think they're doing the world a favor while they consume 2000x the natural resources. Things like a plaid tesla or electric hummer are selling the appearance of environmentally friendliness, not the reality. The point of this is to call people out on their hypocrisy, keep people honest, and to keep people in the real world.

tetromino_ 4y ago
I don't see hypocrisy, I see disingenuous criticism. Driving a Tesla is objectively less bad for the environment than driving a Range Rover. So if you buy a Tesla, you are using less carbon than your peer rich folks. But if you are rich, you by definition command a greater share of society's resources, which means more energy and more carbon emitted. You live in a bigger house. Plus a summer villa and a mountain chalet. And a large formal garden with thirsty plants. And a pool. Of course you have more furniture, more clothes. Cars and boats, maybe a plane. You play sports requiring high-tech equipment and expensive-to-maintain facilities. You travel for leisure, and when you travel, you pay to have lots of elbow room, spending carbon to transport empty air. You go in person to plenty of concerts, conferences, matches, performances and get-togethers. You eat an enormous variety of fresh, healthy food which is transported, stored, and prepared in exceedingly inefficiently small batches. Et cetera. The fact that rich emit more carbon than the poor has nothing to do with the fact that the rich are evil or hypocritical, but simply with the fact that they are rich and spend more money. If you were rich, you would emit more carbon too. And if you lined up billionaires against the wall, confiscated their billions and gave them to the poor, the now less-poor would immediately start emitting more carbon.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- iancmceachern 4y ago
  I agree with what you are saying. I'm saying something a bit different. I'm saying that we should be honest and open about it, as you are being. The hypocrisy comes when we say things like this for the rich are earth friendly when their not, giving the people living the not earth friendly lifestyle less awareness of their impact, further distancing themselves from reality. Things like the big electric suvs that are less carbon efficient than a small gas car, many similar examples of "green-washing" luxury products. I'm saying that is hypocritical, not the fact that they consume more, but consuming more while claiming to consume less.

tetromino_ 4y ago

I don't see hypocrisy, I see disingenuous criticism. Driving a Tesla is objectively less bad for the environment than driving a Range Rover. So if you buy a Tesla, you are using less carbon than your peer rich folks. But if you are rich, you by definition command a greater share of society's resources, which means more energy and more carbon emitted. You live in a bigger house. Plus a summer villa and a mountain chalet. And a large formal garden with thirsty plants. And a pool. Of course you have more furniture, more clothes. Cars and boats, maybe a plane. You play sports requiring high-tech equipment and expensive-to-maintain facilities. You travel for leisure, and when you travel, you pay to have lots of elbow room, spending carbon to transport empty air. You go in person to plenty of concerts, conferences, matches, performances and get-togethers. You eat an enormous variety of fresh, healthy food which is transported, stored, and prepared in exceedingly inefficiently small batches. Et cetera. The fact that rich emit more carbon than the poor has nothing to do with the fact that the rich are evil or hypocritical, but simply with the fact that they are rich and spend more money. If you were rich, you would emit more carbon too. And if you lined up billionaires against the wall, confiscated their billions and gave them to the poor, the now less-poor would immediately start emitting more carbon.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
iancmceachern 4y ago
I agree with what you are saying. I'm saying something a bit different. I'm saying that we should be honest and open about it, as you are being. The hypocrisy comes when we say things like this for the rich are earth friendly when their not, giving the people living the not earth friendly lifestyle less awareness of their impact, further distancing themselves from reality. Things like the big electric suvs that are less carbon efficient than a small gas car, many similar examples of "green-washing" luxury products. I'm saying that is hypocritical, not the fact that they consume more, but consuming more while claiming to consume less.