this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
3389 points (100.0% liked)

196

16503 readers
2961 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)

Corporations create the heat and cooling, build the cars and airplanes, and raise the meat for... wait for it... consumers. These things go hand in hand. Asking people to make changes to their lifestyles that will help the environment IS demanding the corporations to stop producing so much pollution. No one wants to take the blame.

When the world is on fire, no one will care, but the idea that corporations are somehow a separate entity from the consumers/individuals that line their pockets with profits is equally irresponsible. It does come down to daily choice, because the corporations follow demand. But no one wants to suffer the inconvenience of changing their lifestyle, so we blame the corporations that we then buy gas, electricity, meat, and cars from. It's blindingly dumb from either direction.

Spiderman points at Spiderman.

Note that the IPCC acknowledges that no one is paying the true cost of energy or food. You could decapitate all corporate executives, and, if we truly wanted to pay the environmental costs of heating, cooling, and food, all prices would go up. If you think things are hard now, give it a decade. Prices for everyone for everything will go up. You could kill all the rich people on the planet, and it wouldn't change that fact, and it wouldn't suddenly make the environment sound. It truly does come down to fundamental lifestyle changes that none of us want to enact.

You cannot eat money.

[–] Kruggles88@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is classic dog wags the tail and vice-versa. Is it the demand causing these corporations to make the product or are they creating the demand through plentiful supply and marketing?

If these entities were to make something with lower emissions and marketed that as a better alternative will nobody buy that something? I highly doubt it...

[–] dani6h@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago

I remember when the things we bought were extremely durable and could last for decades if taken care of, I'm talking about anything, from tools, to cars, to clothes.

Now, from the 2000s to present day, everything is made to be consumed extremely fast, products are made with cheaper materials and most likely designed to fall apart sooner, this increases consumption by A LOT on a shorter span of time meaning more money in less time, something corporations just drool at.

With things being replaced on a shorter span means more energy required for the factories, more materials, more waste, and yes, way more pollution.

A lot of the times the "consumers" were created artificially with this tactics. Many things that lead to the current state of nsumption by the common folk is engineered.

load more comments (11 replies)