[sjwalter]

I didn't say I agree with it. And I disagree the world would be worse.

The world would be much less filled with stress.

Everyone here seems so insanely focused on carbon emissions that anything rural is like verboten--THINK OF THE CAR DEPENDENCE!! lol

[p_j_w]

First off, there's not enough land for the world's population to live like that. If everyone tried to do that, there'd actually be more stress because people would be fighting over their precious extra acre.

>Everyone here seems so insanely focused on carbon emissions

Given climate change and what drives it, is it any wonder? Creating some disasters in the future so we can have less stress now isn't a very good tradeoff.

[sjwalter]

It's like voting--if you know game theory, you know that voting is a waste of your time.

If I spent all my life avoiding "car dependence" at all, much less with the goofy fervor of the virtue-signalling green crew on the internet, I'd have roughly zero impact on climate change.

As it stands, I get to enjoy big ol' diesel trucks and dirtbikes and motorcycles.

Plenty of people don't enjoy these things and are happy sitting on the bus and enjoying things in cities, movie theaters or museums or whatever.

I just have different preferences.

Luckily, my preferences seem rare, so it's no worry.

Also, the biggest driver of climate change is the sun.

[p_j_w]

>Also, the biggest driver of climate change is the sun.

Absolute nonsense.

[sjwalter]

Supposing I'm wrong about that.

Are you saying farmers should drive teslas?

[p_j_w]

No, I'm not saying farmers should drive Teslas.

[pure_simplicity]

> It's like voting--if you know game theory, you know that voting is a waste of your time.

Please explain! I don't know game theory that well.