3 ms·
"The corporate shares of many super-rich are highly polluting." this article is deceptive. What is the suggested solution here, those companies shouldn't exist?
by KyleBerezin 3y ago
"The corporate shares of many super-rich are highly polluting." this article is deceptive. What is the suggested solution here, those companies shouldn't exist? If the companies were owned by the average person would that somehow make them pollute less? This article opens with a picture of a private jet like that is the cause of this pollution, that their extravagance is polluting the planet.
"‘Polluter elite’ are plundering the planet to point of destruction" I guess I should have realized this article had problems from that first line.
- KyleBerezin 3y ago"Despite being massive, the personal consumption of the super-rich is dwarfed by emissions resulting from their investments in companies.17 Investments of the top 1% are estimated to account for between 50% and 70% of their emissions.18" Their source is equally bad, and I have no faith even in that number. I see double counting too, if you blame pollution for buying a car on the customer, and blame that same pollution on the person who owns the shares of the company that made it, you are double counting.