this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
623 points (96.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

9789 readers
3 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Carbon offsets working is when they make it so that producing carbon is expensive enough to change how companies behave. Of course, that could be done better with a number of other schemes like a carbon tax (with or without rebate)

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That could be done better with a campaign of targeted assassinations

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ah, yes, ecoterrorism. A technique with a long history of failure.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I mean, it works by your logic. Carbon caps are very easy to game and continue to fail to change behavior, as shell companies simply "sell" their credits to others. Meanwhile, sabotage materially - as in not on paper, but physically in rhe flesh and blood world - makes polluting more expensive, because equipment gets damaged, needs repaired, and might not get repaired. Even supressing it isn't free, because cops and ~~bribes~~ lobbying costs money and as we saw in the 2020 uprisings the cops cannot be everywhere at once.

Were there a protacted, popular campaign of sabotage that called the state's bluff, there simply wouldn't be enough police or resources to actually make any of this profitable. Actual concessions would have to be made by governments and corporations. This is why the state has been so spectacularly violent against climate acticists despite even green scare "ecoterrorists" simply tying themselves to trees - it actually works. The state belongs to corporations and corporations aren't going to just let us do shit that meaningfully undermines them, if they are actively suggesting the solutions themselves then it's because they know it won't require them to do something they don't want.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

And carbon offsets are really stemming the flow of climate change huh

Fossil fuel profiteers should be killed if for no other reason than the fact that they deserve it

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

That could be done better without the private companies at all.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Like what zero carbon economic system? Or is this yet another case where communism just is assumed to magically work?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

When we no longer have an irrational need to increase profits, it becomes much easier to change production lines to emit less and less carbon.

China, by the way, is the leader in clean energy, despite being the country with the most emissions, which is simply explained by the fact that it was until recently also the country with the largest population in the world.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Carbon offsets fund subsidies to make companies that do choose to use cost-innefective tech able to do so.

The idea is that once people are actually using the tech, it will allow those industries to get more efficient, letting them close the gap in deployment costs. Eventually making it so it isn't cost prohibitive anymore with or without the subsidies.

It's a carrot and stick system, instead of simply a stick system as you describe.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The advantage with a carbon tax with rebate is that the tax comes from the entities that pollute, but the rebate goes back to everyone equally since everyone is harmed equally. Politically, it also means that there is a large group that is invested in that rebate remaining in place. Efforts to lower the tax or introduce loopholes must contend with widespread opposition. Unfortunately, uptake has been slow.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I disagree that providing the rebate to everyone equally is ideal if the intention is to incentivize development and uptake of otherwise cost-innefective systems.

I speak from experience. I live in Canada, and I get carbon rebate cheques. They just show up. They don't incentivize me to do anything at all.

However we also have carbon credits. I'm in the process of installing rooftop solar on my home. The carbon credits I can sell to subsidize the cost of the solar system.

So, in an environment with both, the tax didn't change my behavior at all. The credits however were a meaningful part of my calculus to "put my money where my mouth is" and invest my own money and choices into green tech.

So, I acknowledge that it's anecdotal, but the carrot helped drive my behaviour into a more eco-friendly direction

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If hell is real and you get out by praying then this is not a scam. So if climate change is real and it is stopped by emitting less carbon then carbon offsets are not a scam?

So you are either saying climate change is just something to believe in and therefore carbon offsets are a scam, because they fight a problem that is not real.
Or you are a religious person and are saying that climate change is real, and that carbon offsets are useful, despite them being clearly a scam.
Or you are saying that the medieval system was actually a scam, because the monks did not pray as they said they would. But then this is actually a medieval meme, criticising monks for knowingly lying to people, and completely irrelevant in modern times.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or they're saying that regardless of whether or not heaven and hell are real, both carbon offsets and indulgences are a self-serving practice run by corrupt institutions allowing wealthy people to be publicly absolved from the harm they continue to do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If Good actions → Paradise
Then Indulgences -(Enables the Church to do)→Good actions → Paradise

Don't believe that people in the past accepted things without questioning them.