4 ms·

> but the full report does outline a path forward should sufficient numbers of people and companies take heed. Sure, but a path that depends on companies carin

> but the full report does outline a path forward should sufficient numbers of people and companies take heed. Sure, but a path that depends on companies caring about anything other than profit is a dead end. Companies do not care about ethics, and exceptional (as in, exceptions to the rule) people like Yvonne Chouinard have had to go to great lengths to create atypical corporate structures that may not even work in the long run to try to make companies that don't devolve into amoral profit-seeking. Corporations aren't inherently evil--in most cases being obviously harmful scares away customers--but that's only true as long as the profits don't align with doing harm. And when the profits do align with doing harm, if the people in one company aren't willing to do harm for profit, they'll be outcompeted by a company that is. I'm working on a degree and recently took a required business ethics class and... Jesus Christ. Corporate culture is rotten to its core. The textbook and class were primarily concerned with whitewashing corporate harms and blaming what it couldn't whitewash on consumers. I didn't do as well in the class as I could have, because I was too disgusted with the material to hide it. They literally had the audacity to talk about "balancing the needs of all stakeholders" as if shareholders matter when some of the stakeholders were slaves. Until we stop treating companies like they're benevolent friends, problems like climate change and homelessness are going to remain intractable.

defrost 3y ago
Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies to pivot into being long term energy providers rather than being solely relient on fossil fuel extraction. Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors to invest in parallel atmospheric carbon extraction (although that's largely a kiss on a sabre cut to date). That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials.
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  > Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. I said companies care about profits, not short-term or long-term profits, and the distinction between short- and long-term still doesn't bring in ethics. > Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies to pivot into being long term energy providers rather than being solely relient on fossil fuel extraction. And that pressure isn't working, because corporations care about profits not "pressure".[1] Note that the downtick in production is clearly explained by the pandemic; oil and gas have returned to almost pre-pandemic levels, and coal, arguably the worst of the three, has surpassed pre-pandemic levels. > Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors to invest in parallel atmospheric carbon extraction (although that's largely a kiss on a sabre cut to date). This is exactly the sort of pro-corporate nonsense that I'm talking about here. Fossil fuel extractors should be forced, not asked, to pay, not get paid for the damage they are causing. Why on earth would we pay our tax money to subsidize the companies who knew about climate change and tried to discredit it for decades, and continue to profit from pulling carbon out of the ground and distributing it into our atmosphere? You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they cause, at the same time as openly admitting it has so far produced no results. At some point you've got to admit you are more pro-corporate than you are pro-solving climate change if this is the sort of solution you think is reasonable. Mind you, I'm not questioning your intentions here, I'm saying intentions don't matter here. > That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials. Recycling plastic isn't real, it's a greenwashing campaign by petroleum companies.[2][3][4] This is not a solution, will never be a solution, and was never even intended to be a solution. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-production https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-production [2] https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-is-practically-impossible-and-the-problem-is-getting-worse https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-... [3] https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/ https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/ [4] https://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/the-passionate-eye/recycling-was-a-lie-a-big-lie-to-sell-more-plastic-industry-experts-say-1.5735618 https://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/the-passionate-eye/recyclin...
smokel 3y ago
In a way, companies are simply groups of humans working together. Who is to say that the rottenness emerges from the working together, or whether it is already present in the individual humans? Pre-capitalist societies are known to be even more murder-driven than the current one. Consult the Old Testament for some tips on how to be moral assholes.
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  > In a way, companies are simply groups of humans working together. I mean, no, companies are a lot more than that. > Who is to say that the rottenness emerges from the working together, or whether it is already present in the individual humans? Who cares? Certainly not me. The source of the rottenness isn't particularly relevant to the fact that it's happening and people aren't doing anything about it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

defrost 3y ago

Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies to pivot into being long term energy providers rather than being solely relient on fossil fuel extraction. Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors to invest in parallel atmospheric carbon extraction (although that's largely a kiss on a sabre cut to date). That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials.

kerkeslager 3y ago
> Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. I said companies care about profits, not short-term or long-term profits, and the distinction between short- and long-term still doesn't bring in ethics. > Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies to pivot into being long term energy providers rather than being solely relient on fossil fuel extraction. And that pressure isn't working, because corporations care about profits not "pressure".[1] Note that the downtick in production is clearly explained by the pandemic; oil and gas have returned to almost pre-pandemic levels, and coal, arguably the worst of the three, has surpassed pre-pandemic levels. > Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors to invest in parallel atmospheric carbon extraction (although that's largely a kiss on a sabre cut to date). This is exactly the sort of pro-corporate nonsense that I'm talking about here. Fossil fuel extractors should be forced, not asked, to pay, not get paid for the damage they are causing. Why on earth would we pay our tax money to subsidize the companies who knew about climate change and tried to discredit it for decades, and continue to profit from pulling carbon out of the ground and distributing it into our atmosphere? You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they cause, at the same time as openly admitting it has so far produced no results. At some point you've got to admit you are more pro-corporate than you are pro-solving climate change if this is the sort of solution you think is reasonable. Mind you, I'm not questioning your intentions here, I'm saying intentions don't matter here. > That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials. Recycling plastic isn't real, it's a greenwashing campaign by petroleum companies.[2][3][4] This is not a solution, will never be a solution, and was never even intended to be a solution. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-production https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-production [2] https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-is-practically-impossible-and-the-problem-is-getting-worse https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-... [3] https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/ https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/ [4] https://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/the-passionate-eye/recycling-was-a-lie-a-big-lie-to-sell-more-plastic-industry-experts-say-1.5735618 https://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/the-passionate-eye/recyclin...

smokel 3y ago

In a way, companies are simply groups of humans working together. Who is to say that the rottenness emerges from the working together, or whether it is already present in the individual humans? Pre-capitalist societies are known to be even more murder-driven than the current one. Consult the Old Testament for some tips on how to be moral assholes.

kerkeslager 3y ago
> In a way, companies are simply groups of humans working together. I mean, no, companies are a lot more than that. > Who is to say that the rottenness emerges from the working together, or whether it is already present in the individual humans? Who cares? Certainly not me. The source of the rottenness isn't particularly relevant to the fact that it's happening and people aren't doing anything about it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]