Edit: I wanted to apologize after reading some of the comments. You raise some legitimate points, I realize that there is a subtle malthusian element to this chart and some of you feel like a burden already. Furthermore, you raise a good point about corporate pollution, oil companies, and how their footprint is much greater than average plebs like us.
That’s 100% valid and I don’t disagree with you at all. My “compromise” I guess would be that continue to apply pressure and protest against large corporations, but in terms of ourselves, just pick a few things you can cut down on yourself, it does not have to be everything on this list.
For example, I really prefer having animal products in my diet, but I am willing to live in a small apartment , car-free, and not go on vacation much in my adulthood. In the same way, you guys can pick what you are comfortable with in reducing and what you do not want to compromise on.
All of us have different standards of living and we are flexible on some things, and some things we are not flexible. That is alright, just consider changing what you are comfortable with, but please do not think you are a burden. Your presence and your life is valuable to me. I don’t like to demoralize people.
No, we can simply address it at the same time, especially since we are the consumers of the products those awful companies produce.
Eh, I’m not sure addressing it at the same time is as helpful as it seems.
People have limited bandwidth and energy. Better to rally them to supporting climate action targeting companies, which has the knock on effect of influencing people’s personal climate responsibility. (e.g. if you put a carbon/GHG tax and include the meat industry, then all of a sudden veggie/vegan alternatives are a lot cheaper and people end up buying them without having to personally and collectively motivate themselves.)
Edit: at this point I’m beginning to think that people arguing for consumer responsibility as equally or even more important than legal regulation on emitters are at best useful idiots propping up polluting industries or at worse bad faith actors.
Those people are the target and purpose of this type of industry propaganda.
So what I said? What part of “teaching people over time” meant stop teaching?
Ah yes, so when you said “Let’s do this, before we do anything else”, you meant “Let’s do these things at the same time”. Makes sense.
I was implying that we should lead with that first. Sounds like you’re looking for any reason to pick a fight with someone who is advocating for major changes over minor ones.
Who’s side are you on anyways?
Yes and I said that there is no reason for that and that we can address both at the same time, to which you replied that this is what you are saying, yet now it appears again to not be what you are saying. Are you confused?
I will ignore the rest of your comment as the weak attempt to derail the conversation, that it is.
You know what. I’m going to extend an olive branch here. I think we got off on the wrong foot and we both want the same thing overall. I think we are both nitpicking the minor details looking for a reason to be outraged.
So what do you say, friends?
Being friends is not neccessary for staying on topic and I am not outraged.
Each individual needs to act in a climate conscious way NOW and every corp needs to be heavily regulated to be climate conscious NOW.
Okay cool. So you’re a dickhead. Got it.
Just like the “oLiVe BrAnCh tHo” this is yet another attempt to derail. I hope other readers don’t get distracted.