5 ms·
try suggesting that people should eat more vegetables and less meat - they see red and shout down any chance of reasoning.
by exe34 2y ago
try suggesting that people should eat more vegetables and less meat - they see red and shout down any chance of reasoning.
- dgfitz 2y ago75% of the US is overweight or obese. You’re trying to make a partisan issue out of a not-partisan issue. Please stop.
- exe34 2y agoI would suggest that you are the one who just made it partisan. I'm in the UK personally, but I can immediately tell which side of the political spectrum you are, given the reflexive defence.
- iechoz6H 2y agoUnless they're a vegetarian presumably? I guess 'people' here means North Americans?
- exe34 2y agowell quite. I'm in the UK myself.
- mjamesaustin 2y agoOne person's individual change is a drop of water in the ocean when compared to the vast amount of emissions and pollution and waste produced at scale by corporations. Arguing to your neighbor why they should recycle their plastic water bottle can at most make an infinitesimal difference. Creating a legal responsibility for Coca Cola to clean up the billions of plastic bottles it produces annually, on the other hand, could change the world.
- antisthenes 2y ago> Creating a legal responsibility for Coca Cola to clean up the billions of plastic bottles it produces annually, on the other hand, could change the world. It would change the world in a sense of Coca Cola either going bankrupt, or shrinking to the point of irrelevance, succumbing to competitive pressure of corporations that aren't forced to do such cleanups. Edit: Do better, HN. Explain why you disagree. This argument is a delusional meme, as if people were not the primary consumers of corporations' products. Corporations are reactionary at best and believing there's 0% responsibility on the consumer is a 5 year old child mentality.
- sumeno 2y agoIf they aren't profitable when taking into account their negative externalities than the owners are stealing from the rest of the world and they should go bankrupt. They'd probably figure out a better way to do business instead though
- tsunagatta 2y agoThe incoming government in America loves the idea of tariffs; why not frame it as part of a trade war in a theoretical government set on ending climate change? Place heavy tariffs on any goods that do not have the same cleanup obligations.
- consteval 2y agoI don't understand why enacting a 20% tariff on all imports makes sense, but enacting a 20% carbon tax on every company in order to pay off the damage of pollution is literally unthinkable and would cause every company to go under. The days of letting companies do whatever the fuck they want and doing nothing to steer their incentives in the right direction are gone. It doesn't work, end of. We need to nudge them to do the right thing, and the only thing humans care about is money.
- roamerz 2y agoAfter reading this comment I wonder how much making Ozempic free for all would affect global CO2 emissions.
- ben_w 2y agoMy guess would be 3%: 1) I have no reason to think the carbon intensity per calorie would change 2) it doesn't take much overeating per day to build up, so I'd assume semaglutide based weight reduction reduces calorie intake by about 25% per day unless someone gives me a study (can't find myself as search results biased to news not science) and 3) all agriculture combined is about 12% of emissions multiply together and that would be about 3% of global emissions, which is a start, but not sufficient — we need to target 99.9% for long term sustainability
- Ekaros 2y agoSimilar thing happens when you suggest about living in cages and not single family houses... Or banning cars altogether...
- ben_w 2y ago> Similar thing happens when you suggest about living in cages Cages? Who is even suggesting that?