And a good number of those 42M are right here on this site, perennially outraged about climate change.
Ok, and how does this insight help to solve the problem? Or did you already decide not to solve it?
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice".
As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity ($200/mo - servers in the garage), but in my state that's mostly hydro. I do eat meat though, and I'm not about to stop eating it.
I don't think proper research can be done based on answers from only 4 interviewees. I think I know some people who belong to this group (although it's hard to tell seeing as I don't point blank ask them), and while they do fly quite often, they basically never fly private, which would instantly cut the amount of emissions mentioned in the article.
In addition, carbon taxes, and environmental taxes will specifically target this group as their main source of carbon emission, is transportation.
> I’m what you’d call a bubble team Care to define this for the 99.99999% of consciousnesses outside your head who have no idea what that means
Other people got it because they upvoted. But to shed a little light, a bubble team is a term from the NCAAB for a team that may or may not make the final 64 team bracket. Thus my comment, which again other people understood, is that idk if I'm in the 42M or not. Hey look, arrogance aside you learned something today or not. I at least learned that you have no clue what march madness is. So downvote away it doesnt cha…
Thank you for clarifying. It's an unknown, basically. I too feel in this category about the 42M, although I suspect i'm on the offending side of the line.
I have no clue about "march madness", all I know is it's some kind of american sports thing. I did not go through your past comments, jesus. Anyone who did - stop it.
Ok, and how does this insight help to solve the problem? Or did you already decide not to solve it?
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity (…
> It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice".
No that is bullshit. I am personally willing to pay the price to reduce my carbon impact. Indeed I already do with flights, etc. I couldn't care less if my electricity price doubled or tripled to deal with the problem.
The problem is NOT these upper middle classes as you say, but the lower classes who would be absolutely wiped out by these changes - not to mention losing their cars. That's the insidious part. Low carbon prices actually benefits those lowest on the food chain. It pits the rich against the poor - and how does that go these days?
Ok, and how does this insight help to solve the problem? Or did you already decide not to solve it?
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity (…
What does this accomplish? Calling people hypocrites for "crying" about climate change just makes them deny that their lifestyle is a problem in the first place. That is strictly worse than "hypocrisy": It reduces the prominence of climate change in public discourse and moves public opinion even further away from "let's not destroy our livelihoods" to "muh jobs". In addition, someone who does take their carbon footprint into account but is a flawed human being rather than Jesus still has a lower footprint than someone who ignores it to avoid being a hypocrite.
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity (…
> It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". No that is bullshit. I am personally willing to pay the price to reduce my carbon impact. Indeed I already do with flights, etc. I couldn't care less if my electricity price doubled or tripled to deal with the problem. The problem is NOT these upper middle classes as you say, but the lower classes who would be absolutely wiped out by these changes - not to…
But you can't "pay to reduce your carbon impact". That money, as a rule, does not reduce the amount of carbon you emit. It just makes you feel better. What would make a difference is not flying in the first place, not having a fancy car, not upgrading that phone every year, living in a smaller house, not having kids, not eating meat, not eating non-local fruit and produce, etc, etc. Not quite going back to the stone age, but reducing the quality of life considerably. And that's something the upper middle class is just not prepared to sacrifice, "climate catastrophe" or not, gotta have that beachfront property (looking at you Barack and Al).
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity (…
What does this accomplish? Calling people hypocrites for "crying" about climate change just makes them deny that their lifestyle is a problem in the first place. That is strictly worse than "hypocrisy": It reduces the prominence of climate change in public discourse and moves public opinion even further away from "let's not destroy our livelihoods" to "muh jobs". In addition, someone who does take their carbon footpr…
But they are in denial already. Calling them hypocrites is just stating the obvious. Hopefully it'll make them think, even if for a fleeting minute, and not buy that third Hawaiian vacation this year.
Ok, and how does this insight help to solve the problem? Or did you already decide not to solve it?
I'm not "solving problems" here. I'm just calling out the hypocrisy of the upper middle class who would like to, at the same time, have high carbon upper middle class lifestyle, and cry about climate change on Twitter. It's always got to be someone else who has to "sacrifice". As to me personally, I work from home, so I likely emit considerably less than most people. And most of my energy consumption is electricity (…
Well and I own a considerable amount of woods, don't own a car and do everything by bicycle including in the winter. My house is heated by a hydro-extracter and I live in a province where over 80% of the energy comes from water, so my personal carbon footprint is actually negative.
But that isn't the point: comparing the individual carbon footprints of people to their mindset might be a jolly pastime for some, but the actual levers which really impact CO2 emissions are located at national, transnational and corporate levels and this is precisely where the biggest responsibilities lie.
Everything that makes this look like a issue which can be fixed on a purely individual level is – I am afraid to say – making it worse. And we can ask ourselfs cui bono?
At a moment when we need to retool our whole economy to run on carbon free energy, we really can’t afford to still have people running massive super yachts and palatial mansions.
Other people got it because they upvoted. But to shed a little light, a bubble team is a term from the NCAAB for a team that may or may not make the final 64 team bracket. Thus my comment, which again other people understood, is that idk if I'm in the 42M or not. Hey look, arrogance aside you learned something today or not. I at least learned that you have no clue what march madness is. So downvote away it doesnt cha…
Thank you for clarifying. It's an unknown, basically. I too feel in this category about the 42M, although I suspect i'm on the offending side of the line. I have no clue about "march madness", all I know is it's some kind of american sports thing. I did not go through your past comments, jesus. Anyone who did - stop it.
It was a poor assumption to think everyone would know that term outside of America, my apologies. Almost every major university in America has a men's basketball program so it would be hard not to come upon the term while at 4 year college here in the states.