• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle









  • Compare the top 10% of that cohort against the rest

    Top 10% emit 22 tons of CO2 per year per person [1].

    8 billion * (10% * 22 tons - 1% * 50 tons) = 14 billion tons of CO2 per year, excluding the top 1%.

    Share of total emissions:

    Upper middle class (top 10% excluding top 1%): 39%

    Lower middle class (top 50% excluding top 10%): 38%

    when you create a graph like that without putting values on the axis it’s inherently misleading

    No, it’s a common way to present data in a popular scientific context.

    the issue here is disproportionate impact from the minority.

    No, as the graph shows, the issue is the disproportionate impact from the richest half of the population. Even without the top 1%, the remaining 50-99% percentiles emit far too much. Even without the top 10%, the 50-90% percentiles still emit far too much.

    The downvotes on this post just goes to show that lemmy is overrun by a new generation of climate change deniers, denying not the phenomenon as such, but their own culpability in it.

    But they’ll get what’s coming to them.




  • You’re contradicting yourself, immediately above you say mandatory prison sentence.

    For driving after permanent license revocation. That could perhaps have been clearer; consider it clarified.

    Let’s start from first principles and see where we disagree:

    1. Driving is a privilege, not a right.
    2. That privilege, if repeatedly abused, should be removed permanently.
    3. Once removed, further driving must be disincentiviced, and if necessary, punished.
    4. The disincentive/punishment must apply to rich and poor alike.
    5. It therefore cannot be purely monetary.

    If you disagree with any of the above, I’d like to know which, and why. If you agree with them all, what disincentive/punishment do you suggest, if not incarceration?