|
|
|
|
|
by RattleyCooper
1676 days ago
|
|
Right, but if the article is correct then that dollar per gallon can't actually fix the problem, so you're just tossing money into a pile and being like, "look at how much I'm helping". How about everyone just takes personal responsibility instead of pointing at someone who pollutes more? Because the big corporation you're pointing at can just point their finger at the next bigger problem and then nothing gets done. Thank you for so perfectly illustrating the attitude that climate "activists" seem to take though. "If I have to lift a finger more than the minimum amount I need, in order to point it at someone else, then the problem isn't worth my effort to try to solve. Jerry beats his wife more than I do, so maybe he should stop first" |
|
But on the assumption this isn't just about spewing political catchphrases at people, you're wrong and the person you are replying to is correct.
You've absorbed the subtext of climate change denial propaganda, which says "this isn't happening, if it is happening it's not our fault, if it is our fault then it's not so bad, if it is bad then the alternative is worse, and finally, it was your fault anyway".
Specifically, we're on those last two steps.
Dealing with climate change isn't expensive. Dealing with climate change denial is very expensive. Anyone telling you that we all have to make sacrifices and go back to the stone age because solar, wind, EVs, eating less meat or whatever is impossibly hard, is lying to you.
Just internalize the external costs and we'll have lots of cheaper power. The only real problem is trying to co-ordinate everyone when some people are very prone to believing obvious lies and people can profit from that at the expense of everyone else.