41–50 of 237 posts
On one level this is to be applauded. On another, shipping cheap plastic junk from China all over the world, to finish up in landfill a few years later, is the very definition of environmental vandalism and is Amazon's core business model.
On one level this is to be applauded. On another, shipping cheap plastic junk from China all over the world, to finish up in landfill a few years later, is the very definition of environmental vandalism and is Amazon's core business model.
The systemic fix for this is to tax the externalities (carbon, cheap plastic, whatever) so that prices better reflect the costs to the environment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(The numbers you're mentioning are miniscule.) However: Amazon.com revenue 2018: $233B USD. Market cap: $1T USD I agree this is virtue signalling. Edit: Downvoters: Yeah, you made your point. I'm sure someone will be happy. Please go back to actual work now.
What does the gross revenue of a public company he owns some of have to do with it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sacrificing isn't going to solve the problem. Saying that people need to do that seems to be it's own virtue signal. Climate change is billions of people over decades. Bezos can't sacrifice enough to make a difference.
I do not believe in climate change. I also do not believe in a ruling elite advocating reduced consumption by others while consuming and emitting all they want simply because they have the money to “offset” it. It is an obscene display of privilege.
Billionaire invests $10B dollars to virtue signal and control the behavior of the poor, while not changing his lifestyle at all. 165M dollar environmentally excessive mansion, private jets, and a rocket program that dumps carbon into the air. I’ll be impressed when billionaires actually make sacrifices themselves, rather than just write checks. Checks are important, but let’s be real about these people.
I know this is completely not your point, but do rockets actually dump a lot of carbon? I thought most rocket exhaust was mostly water.
rpjguy seems to regard the rocket thing as Bezos's hobby, for his own entertainment, rather than as an actual attempt to get humanity into space in a meaningful way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(The numbers you're mentioning are miniscule.) However: Amazon.com revenue 2018: $233B USD. Market cap: $1T USD I agree this is virtue signalling. Edit: Downvoters: Yeah, you made your point. I'm sure someone will be happy. Please go back to actual work now.
What does the gross revenue of a public company he owns some of have to do with it?
Edit: Seriously: this topic seems really hot. So many people seem to care about it when it's spoken about in a negative way. Maybe calm down a bit? Am I experiencing outright bullying right now? That's not a great visual for anyone, just saying.
Billionaire invests $10B dollars to virtue signal and control the behavior of the poor, while not changing his lifestyle at all. 165M dollar environmentally excessive mansion, private jets, and a rocket program that dumps carbon into the air. I’ll be impressed when billionaires actually make sacrifices themselves, rather than just write checks. Checks are important, but let’s be real about these people.
I know this is completely not your point, but do rockets actually dump a lot of carbon? I thought most rocket exhaust was mostly water.
Billionaire invests $10B dollars to virtue signal and control the behavior of the poor, while not changing his lifestyle at all. 165M dollar environmentally excessive mansion, private jets, and a rocket program that dumps carbon into the air. I’ll be impressed when billionaires actually make sacrifices themselves, rather than just write checks. Checks are important, but let’s be real about these people.
I know this is completely not your point, but do rockets actually dump a lot of carbon? I thought most rocket exhaust was mostly water.
I don't have a source handy, but I remember hearing that each launch is the equivalent of the annual output of 2 passenger vehicles. So all rockets launches worldwide = 200 drivers.
[1] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20171113006466/en/Fut...
On one level this is to be applauded. On another, shipping cheap plastic junk from China all over the world, to finish up in landfill a few years later, is the very definition of environmental vandalism and is Amazon's core business model.
> On another, shipping cheap plastic junk from China all over the world, to finish up in landfill a few years later, is the very definition of environmental vandalism and is Amazon's core business model. The systemic fix for this is to tax the externalities (carbon, cheap plastic, whatever) so that prices better reflect the costs to the environment.
We need a World War 2 industrial movement (“you will no longer be building cars, you will only build tanks and aircraft for the war effort”) to fix climate change, and only nation states have the ability to mandate the effort required from industry. Market forces alone will not be sufficient.
Couldn't he just buy out the major coal energy companies and force them to become 100% wind+solar+etc within x years.
1. Startup costs for a coal company are high (I assume they are, but it depends on the region)
2. The company has exclusive right to their coal, and it's hard to find other sources of coal that aren't claimed by other companies (not sure on this one, but it also depends on the region)
(these first 2 conditions are in place to make sure that no one starts another coal company after the buyout)
3. The marginal cost of buying a coal company for that purpose is lower than the marginal cost of starting a company which has the same net amount of positive climate change externalities.