• kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    127
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have kids. I am fucking livid that the assholes who pretend climate change isn’t happening have decided to sacrifice their kids and mine on the altar of making a quick buck.

    You can’t eat money, assholes. And you can’t bring it with you when you die. If the future is nothing but more and more severe weather to the point that civilization collapses under the strain, then I hope you live long enough to see it and are unable to hide from reality anymore.

    • quantum_mechanic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why did you choose to have kids knowing what kind of future they would have? This is the reason I didn’t, and also to reduce my footprint in the world. I mean even 20 years ago, it was obvious nothing was going to change. So I don’t know why somebody would willingly have children these days.

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The world has always been a mess. What’s your solution, wait until the world has solved every problem before anyone has kids? Humans would never have even evolved if that’s the plan.

            Even nature is fucked.

            • Final Remix@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t have a solution. You don’t either. And those that can do anything about this shit, won’t, because it’d cost them some of their precious precious money hoard.

              Climate change is basically teetering at the feedback loop point, if it’s not already there. Inflation is out of control. Corporate profits across the board are at an alltime high. Shit’s only going to keep getting worse from here.

      • Restaldt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No… its simply not. Maybe Jimmy John and Mary sue having a dozen offspring in missouri are a slight part of the problem but your average person have one or two is not the problem.

        As with everything in this world: Its the corporations. They are the problem. No amount of reuse, reduction, or recycling by any individual would even register on the graph of emissions/carbon footprint when compared to even a tiny company

        I do agree that its irresponsible to subject yet another human being to the future we are careening towards

        • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean, I get what you are saying, but if for a few generations only every 10th family would have only 1 child, GHG emissions would fall drastically. Having a kid basically more than doubles ‘your’ own carbon footprint.

          Is this the only, the necessary, or the preferred way? Ofc not. Is it the biggest impact I can personally have on global warming? It is (voting, protesting, buying local & sustainable helps, but whatever you are doing the kids are doing it too).

          It’s sad bcs there are so many ways we could solve this (at least achieve carbon neutrality, tho we need more than that now), but short-term profits of the current elite would suffer a little tiny bit so we can’t do it.

          But additionally now we do need to prep to mitigate consequences and damage control (on top of green/ESG investments) … I wonder if all those profits will be used to finance this …

    • juched@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is why we have 2A in the US. Maybe we should start thinking about using it.

      • Dkarma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Every 2a person I’ve ever met who talks this way wants to shoot the wrong people.

        It’s almost like maybe we shouldn’t rely on the lowest common denominator to resolve complex nuanced issues, huh?

        • killa44@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’ve never talked to a single socialist, anarchist, leftist, etc. about civilian firearm ownership before? It’s very commonly thought of as a necessary evil to prevent systemic oppression. Maybe don’t spend so much of your time talking to trumpers and neoconservatives?

          To wit: there is no “right people” to want to shoot, and anyone who thinks there is probably has their own tribalism issue to work out. Community defense specifically does not have a target right up until the point someone else is an aggressor, and ends when violence is no longer needed. This is why you never saw “antifa burns down trump supporter’s house” or whatever in the news.

          • Dkarma@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh yeah sorry I forgot to mention I’m in an area where redneck right wing stupidity abounds.

            • juched@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yea fortunately im not a redneck. I totally understand how that line if thinking can make people uneasy. I think 2A is more useful in an “arm the workers” type of way