• Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    11 months ago

    That’s bullshit of a report. If you read it, you will quickly learn how they calculate emissions from the rich. They include things like owning company shares and having influence over the media. So if Bezos owns a major stake in Amazon, he is automatically responsible for all Amazon emissions. And if his PR team publishes some stuff to FB, he’s now responsoble for emissions of Facebook servers. That’s utter bullshit.

    If you buy from Amazon, it’s YOU who are responsoble for all associated emissions like delivery, manufacturing, etc, not Bezos. This report also doesn’t take into account that better off people usually live in well-insulated homes, drive more efficient cars and eat better organic food, thus reducing their footprint further.

    This report also mentions yachts and private jets a lot, but don’t forget that ALL airtraffic accounts only for 2% of all emissions and private jets are a drop in the ocean.

    • maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you buy from Amazon, it’s YOU who are responsoble for all associated emissions like delivery, manufacturing, etc, not Bezos.

      That would only be true if Amazon had real competition and would not be acting like a monopoly, as many other companies do.

      • rchive@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Amazon is very much not a monopoly. There are thousands of online retailers. There are also a lot of delivery services, no idea if there are thousands, but there’s a lot.

      • statist43@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        And if they would offer a envoirementfriendly alternative, that nobody uses.

        But let me tell you a non secret, they dont give a shit

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      eat better organic food

      A slight nit-pick here, but when it comes to greenhouse gas impact, organic food may be worse. It’s certainly not clearly better.

      • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Almost definitely worse lol. We have the option to modify the genome of the plants we eat in order to make then better in every way and still some people are like “no that’s icky because science”.

      • CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah I’ve overheard that before too. If they would just change their words to “eat less meat” they’re be right, but to only say “organic” implies standard agriculture is worse, and it is not clearly so.

        We should eat less meat though.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          11 months ago

          We sholdn’t eat less meat, meat is pretty much zero emission and closed loop food production. We should more.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        organic food definitely uses more resources per unit output than “commercial” ag. It can’t supply the world’s food supply unless they greatly increase their capabilities. It’s either “modern methods” or we reduce the worlds population.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you buy from Amazon, it’s YOU who are responsoble for all associated emissions like delivery, manufacturing, etc, not Bezos.

      no, i’m not.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Please explain how you aren’t responsible for the emissions used to manufacture/deliver the product that you personally purchased.

        Did someone force you to buy it? No? Then it’s your fault.

        REDUCE. REUSE. RECYCLE.

        The more products you consume, the more emissions for those products. If you don’t like it, then don’t buy it. Source from responsible retailers, or at least don’t buy from fucking Amazon. Everything about the system we live in exists because people like you throw money at billionaires and then complain that they’re rich.

        “I’m not responsible for being a consumer whore” is the exact lack of personal responsibility that makes anything else you say a joke.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Please explain how you aren’t responsible for the emissions used to manufacture/deliver the product that you personally purchased.

          if i don’t buy it, will the producer have already done all the pollution? if i don’t buy it, will any fewer trucks run? no. but if the producer doesn’t make it, the pollution doesn’t happen. the fault lies entirely with the producers.

          • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            If people don’t buy a product, then there’s no demand.

            If there’s no demand, a product doesn’t get created.

            Do you think people are out here making shit for fun until someone comes along and purchases it? That producers produce in a vacuum without any kind of reason as to why? They make it cause you’ll buy it. Therefore the consumers create the demand that leads to the product being produced in the first place.

            It’s insane that you can fundamentally misunderstand basic economics this much, to think the consumers don’t have any effect on what is created.

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              If there’s no demand, a product doesn’t get created.

              that’s just not true. people make things without a proven market all the time. in fact, all consumer goods are made before they are proven to be able to be sold.

            • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              This guy either has no sense of personal responsibility or he doesn’t understand supply and demand for shit.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                “supply and demand” isn’t a magic phrase that makes me responsible for what other people do.

              • Dkcecil91@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                Personal responsibility has been an excellent tool for large corporations who make deliberate business decisions causing their manufacturing process to be worse for workers and the environment. Belief in personal responsibility as a serious value is what allowed a scam like recycling to be knowingly pushed by polluters for decades as a consumer-driven solution that requires little to no work from producers even though most products can’t be recycled anyway and recycling is, in fact, not a solution to anything in and of itself.

    • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Go look at any multimillionaire’s house in California and then compared its resource usage to a dilapidated trailer in the deep south in a poor county. They’ll be using 50-100x the resources of the poor family.

    • wizzor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It is worth noting that the richest 1% includes everyone who makes more than 140k$/year.