‘Polluter elite’ are plundering the planet to point of destruction, says Oxfam after comprehensive study of climate inequality
    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      3 years ago

      We pretend we can keep car culture and convert the whole industry to EV when that is financially and physically impossible.

      It’s certainly possible to convert the whole car industry to EVs. The only trouble is it won’t actually solve our problems because car dependency ruins all sorts of other things in addition to the climate, and for most of those the real issue is the amount of space they take up, so even running them on magic pixie dust wouldn’t help.

        • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
          8·
          3 years ago

          Okay, let me rephrase: even if we assume for the purpose of this discussion that it were possible to 100% transition to EVs, it still wouldn’t solve our problems because the worst thing wrong with cars is the sheer amount of space they take up, to the point of forcing us to literally destroy our cities to make room for them. Hell, the damage from mining the concrete for all the parking lots alone dwarfs the damage from mining the lithium for batteries!

          That’s the point I was trying to make, not quibbling over EVs.

    • Sagifurius@lemm.eeBanned
      4·
      3 years ago

      less than 100 years ago, everyone used horses my part the world, we couldn’t afford Model T’s in 1923. People now whine an electric car is unsuitable for winter, that’s trues, but only true because the horse infrastructure of no more than 20 miles between population centers has disappeared, it’s 50 to 100 now, with a population density per square mile of less then .25

  • BeefPiano@lemmy.worldEnglish
    20·
    3 years ago

    Meanwhile the poorest 66% will suffer far more from climate change than the richest 1%. Heat deaths from wet bulb events, famine, unsafe air…

  • mystic-macaroni@lemmy.ml
    151·
    3 years ago

    These articles are somewhat disingenuous. It isn’t their mansions, their jets, or their yachts. It’s because of the amount they have invested in fossil fuels and other industries. A better question is why do they have enough money to own so much.

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      2·
      3 years ago

      And as private shareholders they demand those oil companies maximize irresponsible profit at the planet’s expense.

      When you own something, you bear responsibility for it. Not legally sadly, because these criminals make the laws, but in every other sense.

      You don’t get to own oil stock and then credibly claim you aren’t the problem. No one puts a gun to anyone’s head and says take the stake in blood money.

    • Saizaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      111·
      3 years ago

      I mean if you had bothered to open the article, it’s in the 2nd paragraph:

      The most comprehensive study of global climate inequality ever undertaken shows that this elite group, made up of 77 million people including billionaires, millionaires and those paid more than US$140,000 (£112,500) a year

      • someguy3@lemmy.world
        53·
        3 years ago

        I did, that continues as:

        more than US$140,000 (£112,500) a year, accounted for 16% of all CO2 emissions in 2019 – enough to cause more than a million excess deaths due to heat, according to the report.

        Which is not the same as the headline.

        • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
          5·
          3 years ago

          Top 1% does 16%, bottom 66% does 16%, middle 33% does 68%.

          On a per-capita basis, the top 1% is 8x worse than the middle 33% and 66x worse than the bottom 66%.

    • Sagifurius@lemm.eeBanned
      24·
      3 years ago

      absolutely irrelevant and disingenuous using local income on a global scale. Dude making 130, 000 in Vancouver these days is a broke motherfucker (before tax)

  • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
    83·
    3 years ago

    We are the top 1%.

    What’s unmentioned is that the top 1%, the top 2%, the top 5%, even the top 10% has a disproportionate impact on emissions. That group is made up mostly by the West, but also the rich elite in China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, etc.

    • Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml
      31·
      3 years ago

      America is ~5% of the global population alone. Europe is twice that. So by living in the west you’re in the top ~15% sure, but not necessarily the top 1%.

      • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
        1·
        3 years ago

        I mean, I agree as a whole, but I’m assuming that the online population trends upwards socioeconomically. 140k USD isn’t that high of a salary for the US coastal elite.

        • Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml
          1·
          3 years ago

          Maybe a fair assumption for developing countries, but in countries where internet access approaches or exceeds 90% idk how you could justify that assumption

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      4·
      3 years ago

      Not sure why you chose Bill Gates who is the only one of this club actively trying to help this segment of world society and ostensibly planning to give away his wealth. Bezos, Musk, Jobs, all far more deserving of this.

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        25·
        3 years ago

        Because he’s the biggest player in the depopulation narrative. I thought him being responsible for forever covid to make a buck and his ties to Epstein would have been enough to ruin his reputation but I guess LTT was a warning that PR can whitewash even the biggest monster.