Additionally, the impact that individual consumers can make pales in comparison to the impact a corporation can make when it comes to preserving our environment. We’ve been tricked to think that the most minimal of our actions (banning bags and straws) is enough.
NASA climatologist James Hansen testified to Congress in 1988 that climate change was a risk and that we should continue building more nuclear power despite Chernobyl having happened the year before.
If we had done that, we would have solved climate change in the 90s.
We had sufficient time. We had sufficient technology.
But instead of fighting for the environment, the environmentalists fought against it.
This provided the first Bush cover to kill nuclear so that his fossil fuel sponsors could make more profits.
Environmentalists had virtually nothing to do with it. Yes, many people started opposing nuclear power, but please dont believe that had any impact on the matter. Its been the coal and oil industry from the very beginning and even people considering themselves educated on the matter being fooled shows how well they are covering it up.
There are exponentially more environmentalists now that in the 80s so how come they ‘succeeded’ in cranking down on nuclear power back then but cant even remotely stop coal from expanding even further?
Seriously, please try to break free from your brainwashing.
Environmentalists wanted to stop nuclear power. They also wanted many other things. They wanted to stop coal and replace it by renewable energies. I am sure you know very well which of the two was way more important to them and which ‘succeeded’ in the end.
Environmentalists did what they could, what they were allowed to influence. Yes, in hindsight the order was wrong, but not because they wanted it that way but because there was no chance at all for it going otherwise.
Thats not entirely true though. What you are referring to is the impact of a single person vs the impact of a corporation, which is obvious. But if everyone would change their lifestyles and started taking this matter seriously, that would have by far the greatest inpact. Also every corporation depends on its customers and if those dont consume the way they used to, corporations are forced to change in the same way. This ‘people like us cant make a change’ bullshit attitude is the same as ‘Im not voting because whats a single vote gonna do’.
Right but selecting ecologically responsible products is often a privileged, and educated decision. Many folks are excited for whatever plastic wrapped food they can afford after a long day, and they are not going to make a trip to a special recycling center to ensure the plastic is actually diverted.
Legislation is needed to ensure people can still get things they need, but corporations are held to a higher standard
It’s exactly these types of group-action dilemmas that a governmental system is best suited to assisting with.
Overcome tough issues individuals are not well positioned to improve, while ensuring the underprivileged don’t fall off the wagon.
Entire industries are dominated by maybe a couple of corporations each and you’re telling us they’re at the mercy of the customer? They certainly don’t seem to be at the mercy of the customer with all this “inflation” they keep imposing on us. They choose to pollute because it’s cheaper for them and they don’t bother passing on those savings, they instead use it for higher profit margins. If you think they’re afraid of being undercut by a competitor, then they wouldn’t be fighting legislation that would apply across the industry.
I never said they are afraid. They dont need to be as long as most people dont care and keep consumung blindly. Still, a company without customers cant exist. How would a butcher keep his Business if everyone suddenly went vegan? Companies wont magically start caring about the environment because they are not people with feelings. Every single decision is based on profits. If changing their ways would become more profitable (eg by greater acceptance by customers), they would do so.
Kind of seems like you’re bending in a pretzel to shift blame onto customers. Yes, customers do exist, but they don’t have as much control over supply as you think they do. Companies themselves are not people, but they are run by people and they make deliberate decisions on how they bring their products and services to market. Again, there is nothing that requires them to hire lobbyists to prevent legislation that would improve the situation across the industry.
You misread my comment entirely. I didnt say customers are to blame for companies’ actions, I said as long as customers dont change companies wont either because they dont have to. All that matters to them is profit and not recycling is cheaper. Companies are not people, they are capitalist entities.
Jesus, please learn to read before starting an argument. Thanks. Whats the point in trying to make me seem like Im defending companies when Im clearly not? I was merely stating facts. Your attitude of getting defensive even when youre not attacked, just by being told that every single person has a part in this, is really sad. You cant keep blaming everyone else your whole life, thats exactly what brought us these problems. ‘I dont have to change because they are way worse than me’.
Oh and before you reply, I wont respond if you dont at least try to read my comment up there. Quote a single line where I defend corporations and I will gladly keep the discussion going. That wont be the case though, as there arent any.
It’s reduce, reuse, and then lastly recycle.
Additionally, the impact that individual consumers can make pales in comparison to the impact a corporation can make when it comes to preserving our environment. We’ve been tricked to think that the most minimal of our actions (banning bags and straws) is enough.
We should burn CEOs for power.
That an idea
It’s been almost 40 years since we were told we had 20 years.
No one did a fucking thing.
We were also told that by the time we notice the changes, it’s too late.
Well guess what we’re noticing?
Customer service ruined my faith in humanity but the climate crisis killed it completely…
I will repeat this ad nauseam.
NASA climatologist James Hansen testified to Congress in 1988 that climate change was a risk and that we should continue building more nuclear power despite Chernobyl having happened the year before.
If we had done that, we would have solved climate change in the 90s.
We had sufficient time. We had sufficient technology.
But instead of fighting for the environment, the environmentalists fought against it.
This provided the first Bush cover to kill nuclear so that his fossil fuel sponsors could make more profits.
Environmentalists had virtually nothing to do with it. Yes, many people started opposing nuclear power, but please dont believe that had any impact on the matter. Its been the coal and oil industry from the very beginning and even people considering themselves educated on the matter being fooled shows how well they are covering it up.
There are exponentially more environmentalists now that in the 80s so how come they ‘succeeded’ in cranking down on nuclear power back then but cant even remotely stop coal from expanding even further?
Environmentalists back then succeeded in stopping Freon through the Montreal Protocol. They had major clout.
They absolutely are to blame. They don’t get a free pass for destroying our climate while being hypocrites.
The coal and oil lobby also deserve blame, but they were not hypocrites.
Seriously, please try to break free from your brainwashing. Environmentalists wanted to stop nuclear power. They also wanted many other things. They wanted to stop coal and replace it by renewable energies. I am sure you know very well which of the two was way more important to them and which ‘succeeded’ in the end. Environmentalists did what they could, what they were allowed to influence. Yes, in hindsight the order was wrong, but not because they wanted it that way but because there was no chance at all for it going otherwise.
Lol, I am old enough to have seen it with my own eyes.
And even today they are opposing nuclear.
With nuclear we wouldn’t have never exceeded 1 degrees warming or 400 ppm CO2.
History will not be kind to the environmentalists.
Does it feel good to be this ignorant? Makes me sad that those who oppose change dont even seem to realize its them.
You’re just projecting.
Me: in favour of all low carbon technologies that get us to net zero.
You and other environmentalists: opposed to the one technology that actually can do the heavy lifting
Thats not entirely true though. What you are referring to is the impact of a single person vs the impact of a corporation, which is obvious. But if everyone would change their lifestyles and started taking this matter seriously, that would have by far the greatest inpact. Also every corporation depends on its customers and if those dont consume the way they used to, corporations are forced to change in the same way. This ‘people like us cant make a change’ bullshit attitude is the same as ‘Im not voting because whats a single vote gonna do’.
Right but selecting ecologically responsible products is often a privileged, and educated decision. Many folks are excited for whatever plastic wrapped food they can afford after a long day, and they are not going to make a trip to a special recycling center to ensure the plastic is actually diverted.
Legislation is needed to ensure people can still get things they need, but corporations are held to a higher standard
It’s exactly these types of group-action dilemmas that a governmental system is best suited to assisting with.
Overcome tough issues individuals are not well positioned to improve, while ensuring the underprivileged don’t fall off the wagon.
I absolutely agree, just wanted to point out that we cant divert all responsibility because we feel powerless in comparison.
Entire industries are dominated by maybe a couple of corporations each and you’re telling us they’re at the mercy of the customer? They certainly don’t seem to be at the mercy of the customer with all this “inflation” they keep imposing on us. They choose to pollute because it’s cheaper for them and they don’t bother passing on those savings, they instead use it for higher profit margins. If you think they’re afraid of being undercut by a competitor, then they wouldn’t be fighting legislation that would apply across the industry.
I never said they are afraid. They dont need to be as long as most people dont care and keep consumung blindly. Still, a company without customers cant exist. How would a butcher keep his Business if everyone suddenly went vegan? Companies wont magically start caring about the environment because they are not people with feelings. Every single decision is based on profits. If changing their ways would become more profitable (eg by greater acceptance by customers), they would do so.
Kind of seems like you’re bending in a pretzel to shift blame onto customers. Yes, customers do exist, but they don’t have as much control over supply as you think they do. Companies themselves are not people, but they are run by people and they make deliberate decisions on how they bring their products and services to market. Again, there is nothing that requires them to hire lobbyists to prevent legislation that would improve the situation across the industry.
Fuck off with this shit.
You going to tell me the grocery store I work in can’t recycle just because we have customers walking in the door?
You’re going to say that pulp mills just can’t help but mix waste with sand so they can legally dump it, because somebody is buying some paper?
Just because someone is buying their product doesn’t mean they can’t be doing a whole fuck of a lot more.
You misread my comment entirely. I didnt say customers are to blame for companies’ actions, I said as long as customers dont change companies wont either because they dont have to. All that matters to them is profit and not recycling is cheaper. Companies are not people, they are capitalist entities.
No I get it, you are attempting to free the decision makers of these companies from being accountable for their decisions.
Why can’t you just hold a company to a better standard? Why can’t we just expect better? Why are you giving companies a free pass on this?
Jesus, please learn to read before starting an argument. Thanks. Whats the point in trying to make me seem like Im defending companies when Im clearly not? I was merely stating facts. Your attitude of getting defensive even when youre not attacked, just by being told that every single person has a part in this, is really sad. You cant keep blaming everyone else your whole life, thats exactly what brought us these problems. ‘I dont have to change because they are way worse than me’.
Oh and before you reply, I wont respond if you dont at least try to read my comment up there. Quote a single line where I defend corporations and I will gladly keep the discussion going. That wont be the case though, as there arent any.