this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
448 points (98.3% liked)

Today I Learned (TIL)

6491 readers
20 users here now

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.

Share your knowledge and experience!

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/4199810

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 105 points 2 days ago (5 children)

This infuriates me.

I would actually love to do more to REDUCE my carbon footprint, but it's prohibitively expensive to.

But billionaires (and millionaires) can literally greenify every aspect of their lives, even be carbon-neutral or carbon negative! But they choose not to.

I think taxing the rich just isn't enough. We need to CAP the rich. There should be no billionaires.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

yeah we do need to bust a cap in the rich, i agree

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

They can spend millions trying to reduce everyone’s carbon footprints. Like literally they can lobby for trains and shit. But no they won’t.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Its designed to infuriate you. This is not personal emissions of billionaires, its including their businesses.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

brother, that doesn't make it any better. these pieces of shit can do more pollution in 90 minutes than any of us will in a life time since it's for their business? the one which is such a massive operation of exploitation and extraction that it earns them billions of illbegotten dollars, which is why they're being talked about to begin with?

"this infuriating shit was designed to infuriate you, don't be infuriated, just accept it instead!"

this is the same stupid shit argument as "um bezos can't pay more taxes bc he doesn't actually have all the money his networth implies, that's not how networth works" as if people mad at jeff bezos or any of these other worthless rich parasites don't know that, as if we need someone like you to explain some stupid shit to us

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

This is not personal emissions of billionaires, its including their businesses.

The Oxfam report says that private planes and "superyachts" are contributing factors, as well as investments in polluting industries like oil and mining.

Nowhere does it mention that their businesses are what's contributing to their carbon footprint. They are explicitly talking about their lifestyle choices.

So, I'm not sure where you got that info from, but if they are including businesses that these billionaires run, I'd be interested in seeing that data.

Mind you, the majority of these billionaires are in software... a business that's very easy to convert over to a carbon-neutral model, especially with their resources.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A billionaire is a business themselves. One person can't even passively possess a billion dollars without tons of support staff

If you separate the direct actions of the person from the actions of the staff required to maintain and grow their wealth, you're missing most of the reason why billionaires are so harmful to society

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Either we need the figures to represent a billionaires emissions when dealing only with their personal benefit, or we offset the current figures with the benefit to society for their ventures.

Im sure their personal emissions are bad enough. We dont need to make shit up. If willful ignornace had a physical form, it would be Lemmy's mascot. Truth is the only thing that matters.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But again, it's all for their personal benefit. A human Their money is managed to grow by any means, and that has a lot of knock on effects

They generally either put their money in funds with the highest returns (which often use unethical and illegal but accepted practices, and the best ones require large minimum deposits), or they directly own large percentages of a company and use that influence when it suits them

I see where you're coming from, but I think the line is blurry. Their direct personal actions don't capture the full extent of their actions, but this also assumes full responsibility for their ownership, where honestly it's impossible to know what level of emissions the companies would have if the billionaire's wealth machine wasn't involved

I wouldn't say this is totally unfair to say though - at the end of the day they own what they own, and letting others do your dirty work doesn't absolve you of responsibility

The fact that their life would barely be affected if they added emissions to their criteria for investment makes this worse - these are the figures the billionaires should be looking at to make decisions

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The line isn't blurry, it's disingenuous. Those companies hire thousands of people. They serve millions of people. Otherwise advocating against billionaires using this argument means you automatically argue against any modern solution to a problem. No stores, no supply chain, no agricultute, no medicine. Hell, you can't even go for earlier periods - Genghis Khan was a billionaire and deserves flak for the gazillion horses his army used which contributed to climate change.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

you're just typing a paragraph to employ the "job creators" myth as an argument lol

so being a middle man who does nothing but extract and capitalize on needs that people have makes you a job creator? pretty sure mcdonalds didn't create hungry people and people would have needed to buy a burger regardless of whether or not mcdonald's was a multibillion dollar corporation.

i will admit, mcdonalds does create some hungry people tho-- their own workers, who they underpay by massive amounts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

What's your point? There is no difference in 50 McDonalds locations and 50 independent burger joints when it comes to carbon footprint. If there is a difference, then it is in McDonalds favour - economy of scale, established logistics etc. Probably three different places need to pop up to offset one McDonalds beimg magically removed, each with its own AC, freezers, grills.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Carefully Autopsy their Person?
Sounds good.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Cap them in their knees.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Some would argue that we could simply cap the rich instead

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

But I'm the asshole for not using the public transportation my city doesn't have. Anyway, I need to get to the grocery store I should start walking now so I can be there before it closes in 2 hours.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Please don’t use this as an excuse for. “It doesn’t matter how much I emit then”.

Use this as motivation for grassroots and political action aiming to stop the concept of billionaire from existing.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think I just found out I can reverse my entire life's footprint if I can manage to blow smoke in one billionaire's face.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Probably two lives, given their security will likely shoot you in the face.

ACAB.

[–] otp 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

... billionaires' security are not cops

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

True, there's no masking in private security.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well they both use the threat of violence to reinforce the status quo. So in my mind they are effectively the same.

[–] otp 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I feel like that's missing the point of ACAB.

The problem with cops is that there are good cops who generally behave well and genuinely want to serve and protect their communities. The reason they're still bastards is because of the unions that they keep (and support). They have some bad apples, and not removing them from the bunch means the bunch gets spoiled.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

The problem with cops is that there are good cops who ~~generally behave well and genuinely want to serve and protect their communities~~ do not report bad cops.

They are law enforcement, enforce the law. No exceptions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

The ones that do, aren't cops for long.

[–] otp 7 points 2 days ago

Yes, I agree completely. I was just explaining that it's not ACAB because literally all cops are out there getting away with extrajudicial beatings. It's ACAB because they don't throw out the bad apples (aka. don't report bad cops)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Also I doubt anyone in this comment section is average.

The average sits somewhere between us and the all the people in third world country who emit practically no carbon pollution

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

The only way to stop it is when we're hungry enough, and it's time to eat.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

Damn, thank god we killed plastic straws for people with sensitive mouth problems. Thank god Musk can ride his jet 24/7.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So stop eating cows and eat the rich instead?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Whether or not you eat the rich, please consider not eating the cows.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

There are no innocent millionaires. The threshold of wealth that requires some seriously unethical behaviour is pretty low.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What do you count as innocent? Like doesn't use products made in factories with human rights violations? I'm never gonna hit a million, but economists are saying we all need to have a Mil or three in order to retire? I know a couple million airs who seem like normal people, they're just business owners?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean there is no way to goss a million a year without directly and knowingly exploiting people on a daily basis.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Millionaire refers to total wealth or cash on hand, not annual salary. Someone making $1M a year is probably worth $100M+ if they own stocks and may be well on their way to billionaire.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

That's not true you can earn a few million from hard work. Its rare these days, but doable. Still pennies compared to Elon et. al. I think the cutoff should be between 50-100 million. After that we name a park after you and you get a trophy for winning at capitalism. Congrats or whatever, but we're taking the rest.

Whatever the threshold, it needs to be indexed to inflation and COL in the local area.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You definitely can not become a millionaire on YOUR hard work. It takes the hard work of other people working for you. And unless you over charging for their work or under paying them for their work, you aren't going to be making millions.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

That's completely, 100% untrue.

I'm going to make these numbers up, but the math checks out.

If you're a nurse making 100k/year, let's assume you take home 60k of that. You'll take home a million dollars after "just" 17 years. Are you really going to tell me that nurses are exploitative labor?

Now, I'm not going to get into the math of expenses because I'm lazy, but I'm also not factoring in any kind of investing either.

Now, those nurses need a supervisor to handle advanced work they aren't familiar with, scheduling, dealing with mgmt, telling Drs to fuck off, etc. So if that nurse lead takes home 100k, they can do it even sooner at just 10 years. You can argue that this is exploitative labor, but you'd be wrong.

At some point you get supervisors that don't do or contribute anything and pull in like 500k/year. Those jobs should probably not exist since they are by definition exploitative. But earning a few million dollars over the course of your lifetime is easily achievable on your own labor alone.

You can't be a billionaire on your own labor. You can be a millionaire on your own labor, but it isn't easy and takes a long time.

My net worth is almost a million dollars because my wife and I don't have kids and our jobs pay decently. We should be millionaires in the next five years or less. We don't have anyone who reports to us. Who have we exploited? In my col area we need (currently) 3 million total to live a modest retirement. Under your plan, this would be impossible to achieve. Do you want to make everyone a wage slave forever? And that's ignoring high COL areas like NYC and LA where a million dollars might get you a small house.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I disagree, since the Internet allows indie studios for things like music and games to reach a massive audience. Selling your indie game that you made with your friends for $20 to 300k people makes you a millionaire without exploiting anyone. As long as you can avoid publishers leeching most of that away... Plenty of people also have become millionaires just by selling their house and moving somewhere cheaper.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You need to be a millionaire to comfortably retire so...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

wow they must be breathing really hard then

[–] blockheadjt 1 points 1 day ago

It's the farts actually, they're really stinky.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Of course... Work hard, breath hard... A million times harder than you or me, based on income.. /s

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

For perspective, that's over 400,000x as much. As in 40,000,000%.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

When no one was looking, Lex Luthor polluted forty million percent more than an average person. He polluted 40,000,000% more. That's as many as four tens (times a million)%. And that's terrible.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

At some point, things are gonna get bad enough that the masses will turn on them. That’s why they’re all buying islands and building bunkers. We should do it now, while it can make a difference.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Allowing to self exile to islands will make it easier to trap them. Simply destroy their means of leaving.

Bunkers are even easier, burying them in trash.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Don't worry, I got this. I went to the shop by foot today instead of driving.