And it is!

Insufficiently.

Like here in Europe.

It must be a very different kind of Europe than the one I live in.
I live in Germany and regularly encounter such troubles to find ecologically optimal products. Most of the time because there aren’t any available for me. Then there is a huge lack of transparency and sometimes of course the price. Although the latter is not really problematic for me, it is for a lot of other people. Those products, which are environmentally detrimental, are usually much cheaper than the ecologically better ones. You are being financially punished for choosing the better alternatives.

“free range” eggs

Despite the fact that a non-plant based diet is worse than a plant-based one in terms of ecological impact, the industry has been subject to a lot of critique due to insufficient regulations towards the treatment of egg-laying hens. Not only that, but also controls are often not conducted, even though it says so on paper.

The problem here is not Bezos, it’s YOU

Even if we neglect the ecological irresponsible business practises conducted by Bezos & friends, when it comes to individual ecological impact, wealthy people are usually causing a multitude of the damage which is caused by not-that-wealthy individuals. It seems to be a problem inherent to the lifesytle.

Most smaller delivery vehicles here in the UK are fully electric.

That’s cool. However, there is more to electric vehicles which must be considered when we think about ecological impact. (Lifetime, resources, production, etc…) Even if that’s given, this alone doesn’t solve the climate crisis. Although it certainly seems to be a nice step in the right direction.

Regarding the remaining list: that’s surely nice to hear. Still, there are still a plethora of unsolved problems. Even in your country.

And you don’t.

How about you don’t generalise a whole population?

Instead you ban contraception and abortions.

You must have mistaken me with someone from another country. It might help to be less prejudiced.

And it is!

Insufficiently.

Like here in Europe.

It must be a very different kind of Europe than the one I live in.
I live in Germany and regularly encounter such troubles to find ecologically optimal products. Most of the time because there aren’t any available for me. Then there is a huge lack of transparency and sometimes of course the price. Although the latter is not really problematic for me, it is for a lot of other people. Those products, which are environmentally detrimental, are usually much cheaper than the ecologically better ones. You are being financially punished for choosing the better alternatives.

“free range” eggs

Despite the fact that a non-plant based diet is worse than a plant-based one in terms of ecological impact, the industry has been subject to a lot of critique due to insufficient regulations towards the treatment of egg-laying hens. Not only that, but also controls are often not conducted, even though it says so on paper.

The problem here is not Bezos, it’s YOU

Even if we neglect the ecological irresponsible business practises conducted by Bezos & friends, when it comes to individual ecological impact, wealthy people are usually causing a multitude of the damage which is caused by not-that-wealthy individuals. It seems to be a problem inherent to the lifesytle.

Most smaller delivery vehicles here in the UK are fully electric.

That’s cool. However, there is more to electric vehicles which must be considered when we think about ecological impact. (Lifetime, resources, production, etc…) Even if that’s given, this alone doesn’t solve the climate crisis. Although it certainly seems to be a nice step in the right direction.

Regarding the remaining list: that’s surely nice to hear. Still, there are still a plethora of unsolved problems. Even in your country.

And you don’t.

How about you don’t generalise a whole population?

Instead you ban contraception and abortions.

You must have mistaken me with someone from another country. It might help to be less prejudiced.

How does that even go together? Being anti-vax and at the same time condemning people for not being vaccinated?

Get your facts straight next time.

This is also covered in others, more recent findings. Want me to dig them out for you?

If you wouldn’t buy that shit, Bezos won’t be selling that shit and there would be no pollution

Which is part of what I meant by:

“it is mainly due to our modern way of life and production”

But not in such a condemning way as you.
The fact, that you were able to write your comment, shows, that even you felt the necessity to buy stuff. And I am 100 % sure that the device, you used for that, was not produced free of GHG emissions or under ecologically (or even socially) perfect conditions. As bad as this is, this is the case for most people. But did you have a choice? Can you live an average life in our current society without stuff like that? Do you even have the option to choose alternatives?

That’s my point. This kind of “you buy, you choose” attribution of causal chains, is surely true to some degree. But imo it’s an oversimplification to label it completely like that. I can’t even buy fucking organically grown tomatoes in my closest supermarket. So I don’t even have the option to choose the better alternative. This also applies to several other basic foods. Yet, I also need them. Most of the times such items are more expensive than the worse ones. The latter is a huge deal for people who really don’t have that much money. So they literally can’t buy the better options.

The market self-regulates that kind of stuff by itself to some degree. But not completely. And policies worldwide, especially in industry nations, fail to address these issues, thereby fueling the problem. Then of course there are further problems, like a lack of education and awareness about it and so on.

Another thing: how easy do you find it to see which product is the better one from an ecological perspective? How do you know it’s not just greenwashing? Do you feel like it’s an easy choice?
If so, congratz, you are a lucky one. But for most of the rest of us, that’s really not made sufficiently transparent.

Again, something which needs to be regulated.

And then, Bezos and co. could make their whole business conpletely green. Do they want to? Nope. Bezos and co. also could decide not to take their private jets, or live in a private mansion, live lifestyles which cause so incredibly more emissions than the one of average Joes and Janes. And again, they decide against it. But yeah sure, go on making each customer and the whole of humanity responsible.

Not the amount of people are the problem, but their disregard for eco-systems, especially the failings of policies. Humanity managed to survive for thousands of years without fucking up the whole planet. Shit really started to spiral downwards since the industrial revolution.

I bet this is also somehow the immigrants’ fault. /s

(Looking at you, right-wing voters in EU. ò.ó )

Although I also think there is a correlatin between number of people and detrimental climate effects, it’s wrong to reduce the causes to that. Despite the fact that “the richest 10 percent of people produce half of the planet’s individual-consumption-based fossil fuel emissions, while the poorest 50 percent — about 3.5 billion people — contribute only 10 percent”, it is mainly due to our modern way of life and production. As you probably know, the climate started the downwards spiral since the industrialisation. If we werent producing so insanely much GHG-emitting stuff, it wouldn’t be such a problem. (Regarding temperature alone. There are of course also other detrimental effects on our eco-systems due to things like overuse of fertilisers for example.)

Oh ja, richtig. Ich bitte um Entschuldigung!

Ja, sogar auf mehreren Instanzen. Das ist aber auch das Problem. Zersplitterung, statt ein einzelnes Zuhause dafür zu haben. :'(

*gemacht mit Mematik Maimatik

I love this.
Also hilariously illustrates the obsession of so many people over genitals instead of seeing the person having them.

Thanks for pointing it out. There is clearly room for a lot of error.

Wtf is going on with you on the other side of the pond there?

I think they meant other countries, which have liberty and democracy engraved to their core.

Also, please keep it civil. There was no need to be so condescending. If you’re unhappy with the answer, there are better ways to express this. :)

Or, you know, Russia could just get the fuck out of Ukraine and leve them in peace. Much better agreement imo.

How is it profitable?

I wonder whether it’s possible to fight wars without – ideally – having casaulties at all.

For example, sedating instead of killing. Afterwards prison camps or something like that. Admittedly, given the scale, it is financially and logistically a tremendous effort. But how much must a human life “be worth” in order to be spared?

There are other obvious issues like civil unrest, if the other party keeps killing soldiers of one’s own military.

Still, it’s better than to end lifes from my perspective. One side must be the bigger one.

We spend so much effort and resources into specialising how to kill each other. But we don’t use that resources for finding alternative ways.

If there are people who really want to kill each other, throw them together and leave the rest alone.

How is it a proxy war if it was russia which started it?

No one is stopping you from giving yourself a treat for succeeding with such habits.