|
>We cause these companies to pollute by creating a market demand for their products or services. We do. But, what is your point there? Are you saying that individuals have the ability to group up and stop it by not buying? Because that would be true. But, there's always that problem of realism that gets in the way. In theory, yes, we could pretty much solve or do anything as humans. Does that mean its realistically possible? No. Corporations have grown up with capitalistic countries, and are ingrained in its culture and work. Sure, I'll stop shopping at Walmart. Until I see my grocery bills go up, and my savings dipped into to pay bills. Its the same story for many, many others. People don't know any better, and even if they did, and we all grouped together, these conglomerates have such a gargantuan amount of money stored away that they can bet it won't last. They'll win that bet. Employees go on strike, get new ones. Employees try to form a union, close the store, re-open a month later. When you consider the absolutetely massive size of the money and assets here, the very notion that its 'our' fault, is true, but its reasonings misleading. |
My point was just addressing the main theme of the article which is trying to make out that if we just got rid of these companies, we'd cut emissions by 71%. Well yeh sure, but then the world wouldn't continue to function as normal.
As individuals, we have the same methods as we always have. Don't drive when you can walk, use renewable energy, get an electric car, shop local, etc.
And of course, regulating both "ourselves", such that demand goes away. E.g. banning sales of diesel cars. And regulating businesses so that they aren't polluting unduly on our behalf e.g. carbon capture in power stations.