This is a type of discussion where I'm always infuriated that I have to use the wrong terms to describe both the problem and potential solutions. Being forced t

This is a type of discussion where I'm always infuriated that I have to use the wrong terms to describe both the problem and potential solutions. Being forced to choose in terms of "growth" or "degrowth" reduces everything to GDP-centric thinking. Simply making people poor to cut down on 5% of emissions is just like banning plastic straws but allowing plastic cups. Realizing as well that constant economic growth is impossible in the long term is required so we start figuring out a more sustainable system. I'm pretty sure quality of life can be improved even if the GDP shrinks, but it needs to be put as a primary target. At the same time, as an EU citized, the fact that shipping a product from the Netherlands is twice as expensive as a product with free shipping from Temu means that we've got low hanging fruits that can be instantly tackled, but nobody is interested in cost/benefit analysis but only in optics of elections.