[BoorishBears]

You realize the first-world middle class taking cruises is as much a part of the rich as billionaires right?

A yearly salary of something like 32k puts you in the global 1% of earners. I won't be so strict about the definition of the rich, but families having money for cruises are definitely part of the demographic I'm speaking to.

And I mean, vacations is are just the tip of the iceberg, those people so poor they have to use firewood go survive, aren't the reason we have so many commercial airliners shuttling around goods so we can have the latest throwaway item we desire in 48hrs or less.

[_8j50]

Being the global 1% earner means nothing in this context. Income is measured against context of currency. A USD can indeed buy a lot but perhaps housing is a lot cheaper in subsaharan africa than Manhattan? Same for food and other expenses? Regardless of their place in the world, being rich is only significant to how much expendible money you have left after accounting for neccessities. Even in america, $80k/yr can mean you're doing great if you live in some no name suburb or small town but you're lucky if you break even with that in NYC.

Your firewood analogies are sensetionalist but do not answer my question of how even if western civilization vanished over night climate change would be resolved? Perhaps delayed by a few decades. I would even say it might get worse due to undeveloped countries desire to compete with minimal costs and inability to create nuclear power or afford wind turbine farms,solar,etc... When oil,charcol and old cars are already affordable.

[BoorishBears]

You spent a whole paragraph arguing a point invalidated in the next sentence when I point out I'm not using the 1% criteria, but rather the fact you have enough disposable income for a cruise (yes, financing it counts)

And my firewood "analogy" is sensationalist?

Is that a joke or are you just that out of touch with the reality of the actual poor.

My parents grew up in those conditions, and even as recently as the last few years we've had family members back home in that situation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/science/earth/16degrees.h...

-

Your second paragraph is non sequitur. You didn't ask that question or even imply it!

If your point of your screed there is climate change is not worth fighting, it's not a unique viewpoint.

What a terrible thing if we were to come up with less polluting ways of living for no real benefit huh?