all 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 18 points 10 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Some sites break when you disable javascript, but guardian.com instead starts working.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Thanks for the tip! I thought I had every extension for finer control, but I guess I hadn't thought of one that just disables javascript, and you're right, it does just work on that site.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -25 points 10 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 28 points 10 months ago

    simping for the establishment by... pointing out how the ultra wealthy produce much more emissions than most people and thus cause disproportionate climate harms that they themselves will be able to avoid many of with their massive wealth?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • 11 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 41 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    And just ten days in, folks - for the top 1%. It seems the richest 0.1% needed only three.

    While, ironically, the immediate climate crisis affects the poor and marginalized. Then when they come knocking on our door for help, we're told by certain loud voices that it's the immigrants who are at fault.

    When the people wake up, I can't imagine what they'll do to the empathy-starved elite. It won't be pretty.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I’m losing hope that it will happen in our lifetime. There’s just too many brainwashed idiots who rabidly support facism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I'm fairly certain I will die in WWIII before being able to see that glory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    In ww2. 70 million civilians died in Europe alone

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Note that the world's top 1% is 83 million people, which includes way more than 1% of the population of places like the US and western Europe.

    If you're a "middle class" homeowner in a high cost-of-living area, you're part of this statistic.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah but within those 1% the pattern essentially is the same where a small minority puts out way more CO2 than the average person

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago

    I expect even some bigger gaps, because top 1% is usually when you start having enough money to have good living standards efficiently. I.e. at this point you have the option of having efficient construction and waste less on cooling and heating, you can afford more sustainable clothing, both in terms of material and durability, etc. But unfortunately lots of people just decide to turbocharge destructive consumption instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago

    How dare you question your social betters.

    Now go back to sorting your recycling.

  • source
  • 11 comments in c/collapse@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 17 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Yet my neighbor shamed me for riding a motorcycle once this year

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Motorcycles, having far less weight per user, should be more efficient, no?

    As long as you’re not riding a big bore super duper noisy exhaust idgaf. 

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The MythBusters did that one, obviously the info is a bit out of date now but IIRC over the three decades of models they tested they found that motorcycles, while more fuel efficient per mile, have none of the pollution controls of cars so they put out more emissions per mile than the average car of the same age.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 8 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    To give this some context, to be in the richest 1% for income, you need to earn about $80k USD equivalent per year or have a net wealth of about $1.2Million USD equivalent.

    https://daadscholarship.com/how-much-money-need-to-earn-to-join-top-1-of-the-world-in-2025/

    Our annual emissions per person for a sustainable emsiions budget is aboit 2-3t per year. Mostly were relying on the poor to do their bit eg the average Ethipoan emits aboit 0.2t per year. The average American about 15t.

    Anyone who owns a large dog, or flys, or eats lots of beef, or drives a car is emitting morw then theiir share

    We could start by banning all flying.

    As Professor Kevin Anderson has talked of often, if we had the richest 10% live like the average European we could cut emissions by 40%, not enough but a good start and could be easiely implemented in a month.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/07/un-expert-human-rights-climate-crisis-economy

    Outgoing special rapporteur David Boyd says ‘there’s something wrong with our brains that we can’t understand how grave this is’

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    I really think that's misinformation.

    If you earn 80k$ USD but live in a city where your costs are 30k$USD for rent and food, and you pay taxes of 40% (leaves you with 48k$USD), that's 18k$USD. That's 1.5k$ /month that still has to pay for insurances, transport, etc. Where I live, it's at 400€/month at least just for the car because public transport sucks ass here. Insurances are about 200€/month for me but I assume that can be more if you're at 80k$USD.
    All in all, about 1k$ or less per month disposable income. Is that really 1%er life?

    That means that I'm in the top 10% along with nearly everybody in my country and my life isn't glorious. Far from it. If 80k$USD is 1% and just 12k difference means you have to start cutting back on stuff like sharing the apartment, getting cheaper insurances, living in a cheaper place further away from work, buying cheaper groceries, not going to the restaurant or ordering in, cancelling subscriptions and so on, then 1% really doesn't mean much.

    And all that is a single person! Imagine having a family. 80k would be nowhere near enough to start a family, raise children with activities, pay for tuition or anything else. That's 1%? No way.

    If I earned 80k in the middle of bumfuck nowhere where I live, sure, that would be amazing. That's not going to happen though.

    IMO statements like that are from napkin calculations that use averages or medians that do not correct for anything and ignore exponentials. I'd really like to see classification of 1% by net income. I bet it would be very different than just gross income across all countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    Thanks for the info. Living in the US without a car I'm left wondering how much time it takes for me to use my share. I'd wager I haven't passed it yet but I'm not naive enough to think it's much more than a month.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago

    For their lifetime, tbh.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    If humanity was a just another species of our size, its sustainable population would count half a million individuals. Photosynthetic primary productivity calculations put a hard ceiling at about half a billion. I think a safe long term population will be less than a hundred million. At a roughly Edo period Japan technology level.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    The world's richest 1 % have a net worth of just over 1 million USD or more. The world's richest 10 % have a net worth of around 83 000 USD or more.

  • source