Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 115 posts

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#101

Post by phatfish »

reducesuffering wrote: post #97
tristor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it's super in vogue to hate the rich or whatever, but if we want to effectively fight climate change we have to do so strategically, supported by data. The data is pretty clear on this matter, the absolute priority is reducing the carbon footprint of electricity production, the second priority should be reducing the carbon footprint of cargo transport and agriculture, and the third priority should be reducing…

My mindset is likely 95% the same as yours. However, it is also important to curtail wasteful private jet emissions, even if electricity and standards of living are bigger priorities. What I'm also trying to get at, is if you want political consensus on tackling climate change (which half of the US electorate doesn't give af about emissions currently), then we need to have better optics and put some self-sacrifice in…

There was a Bill Gates interview with some guy from the BBC doing a half hour sit down. He asked about the private jets, Bill waffled about having lots of meetings and that his work/investment was to help with projects that would reduce carbon use, etc. etc.

You could tell that 1st class on a public airline was below him and that was his red line. We can take his "help" with the private jet, or we can leave it.

These are elites that want US to change our behaviour. I'm sure a lot of people would rather drive their car than use public transport, Bill. Maybe you could lead by example...

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#102

Post by abenga »

JohnFen wrote: post #26
FredPret wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Existence itself is optional and ultimately meaningless. This is why we have football games and why it's meaningful to see it in person, if you like to.

Of course it has meaning to the people doing it. But this is one (of many) example of people who are so self-absorbed that they don't even think twice about doing harm to everyone else in order to engage in a recreational activity that could be done with far less impact. It's that disregard for people that I condemn.

Just as long as you keep the same energy when their standard of living goes up and they emit as much as you.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#103

Post by Balgair »

ginko wrote: post #68
jtriangle wrote: post #62

Lots of comments in that thread more or less saying "The drive back to LA would be the same time as the flight"... These people have never left Vegas on a Sunday and it shows. That drive is 4 hours, without traffic. With traffic it's an easy 7, I've heard of it being as high as 13. So yeah, if you've got a jet, and the money to fly it, I'd say that you can probably justify using it here, it's like half the time. Thou…

If they wanted to travel to/from LA in style they could have also done this: https://www.amtrak.com/charter-your-private-train

Now that would be old money.

Reminds me of this episode from Archer : https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2207833/

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#104

Post by baggy_trough »

avgcorrection wrote: post #87
baggy_trough wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This lifestyle is very much desired by the middle class so I don't think you can blame the rich for it.

Commuting 1 1/2 hours a day in rush hour traffic because you live in suburbia in order to work in the city center where the “good jobs” are, the great lifestyle dream.

as evidenced by revealed preferences, yes.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#105

Post by baggy_trough »

enterprise_cog wrote: post #92
baggy_trough wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm responding to the exact statement made, so I don't know what you're talking about regarding a least charitable interpretation.

They were talking about private planes and you generalized it to all aviation. You were not responding to the exact statement.

The very first sentence in the parent comment is "All aviation, altogether, private jets inclusive, is less than 3% of world emissions." So your comment is completely off base.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#106

Post by blooalien »

tristor wrote: post #53
groestl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not for all of them in the same manner though. The richest 1% have a carbon footprint equal to the "poorest" 66%, for example.

Only when looking at things globally, and that's mostly because the vast majority of the world population is exceptionally poor with a matching low standard of living. If you look at things in developed countries, the difference in carbon footprint between rich and poor is not nearly so stark. We are /all/ to blame, and we are /all/ going to suffer for it, so we need to pull our heads out of our asses and stop turnin…

Except that it literally is "us vs them", with "them" being the tiny fraction of humans with nearly all the money and "power" who want to keep right on with "business as usual" because money is more important than life, and "us" being all the rest of humanity who literally don't matter in the slightest to "them". We can all die a horrible death for all they care. They just don't understand (nor want to understand) that their actions are gonna end them just as surely as it's gonna end the rest of us. It just might take a tiny bit longer for them to die in their luxury doomsday bunkers.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#107

Post by kayfox »

ginko wrote: post #68
jtriangle wrote: post #62

Lots of comments in that thread more or less saying "The drive back to LA would be the same time as the flight"... These people have never left Vegas on a Sunday and it shows. That drive is 4 hours, without traffic. With traffic it's an easy 7, I've heard of it being as high as 13. So yeah, if you've got a jet, and the money to fly it, I'd say that you can probably justify using it here, it's like half the time. Thou…

If they wanted to travel to/from LA in style they could have also done this: https://www.amtrak.com/charter-your-private-train

Amtrak does not have rail service to Las Vegas, only a (slow) bus.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#108

Post by enterprise_cog »

baggy_trough wrote: post #105
enterprise_cog wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were talking about private planes and you generalized it to all aviation. You were not responding to the exact statement.

The very first sentence in the parent comment is "All aviation, altogether, private jets inclusive, is less than 3% of world emissions." So your comment is completely off base.

Okay, and the person who replied was clearly talking about private planes. Hence the “so simple” part. Unless you interpret it uncharitably, like the person who replied to you said.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#109

Post by Freedom2 »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #80
probably_wrong wrote: post #2

The title is missing a "525" at the beginning - this was probably auto-removed but in this case I'd argue it should be brought back.

I don't see how "525" contributes any value. I gather that the point of the post is to show off a data visualization of a lot of planes leaving Las Vegas. The number feels like an implementation detail.

The title has now changed it seems and I got immensely more value out of the post.

Re: 525 Private jets departed Las Vegas after the Super Bowl ended

#110

Post by baggy_trough »

enterprise_cog wrote: post #108
baggy_trough wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very first sentence in the parent comment is "All aviation, altogether, private jets inclusive, is less than 3% of world emissions." So your comment is completely off base.

Okay, and the person who replied was clearly talking about private planes. Hence the “so simple” part. Unless you interpret it uncharitably, like the person who replied to you said.

That is not clear at all for the reason I stated.
Post reply on HN