418
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I kind of dislike studies like this. Because something like 70% of global greenhouse emissions is because around 20000 specific people that have names and addresses are choosing wealth over sustainability, these are people who literally have the power to stop what they are doing tomorrow and make a larger difference then 100 million voters. When you make things abstract and use terms like 1% you are hiding the real villains of the story.

Also market-based solutions like this:

The study asserts that "results suggest an alternative income or shareholder-based carbon tax, focused on investments, may have equity advantages over traditional consumer-facing cap-and-trade or carbon tax options and be a useful policy tool to encourage decarbonization while raising revenue for climate finance."

Will never provide a solution to climate change, because market based solutions are designed to help the rich, not save the planet.

this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
418 points (95.8% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5234 readers
3 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS