4 ms·
Sorry i guess i misunderstood. Okay the incrementalness is not the thing. The thing is more, the injustice, the unevenness so to say. Well, I think we should no
by nuancebydefault 4y ago
Sorry i guess i misunderstood. Okay the incrementalness is not the thing. The thing is more, the injustice, the unevenness so to say. Well, I think we should not try to solve the injustice problem and the environmental problem with the same measures.
For every rule, there will be people that break it, does that mean nobody should follow that rule?
Also, for every form or quantity of pollution, there are heavier forms. The jet owner will say that the old-aeroplane-collector or a war in a neighboring country pollutes more.
My point is, following that kind of reasoning, it will be almost impossible to take any action.
- ericmay 4y agoI get it. But what I’m saying is that when you walk up to someone and say “sorry turn off that gas stove” and then they go and read an article like this [1] you will not just get inaction you’ll get outright action against solving the problem. So yea, we won’t see much in the way of serious action because the general public does not see the justice in making changes or sacrifices even though they should and will bear the worst of the consequences. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/01/private-jet-sales-likely-to-reach-highest-ever-level-this-year-report-says https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/01/private-jet-sa...
- nuancebydefault 4y agoYou are right, it is even infuriating. It is also infuriating that rich people are allowed to build a huge machine that is set to self destruct soon after take off, generating multi tons of co2 and other air, water and soil pollution. Still,climate change is a problem worth trying to solve.