this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
374 points (98.7% liked)

News

36270 readers
2619 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kautau@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah that number seems super strange, and basing it on income makes little sense unless capital gains and the like are being considered. Even then, someone ultra rich may “appear” to make very little money one year only for their investments to pan out the next year and their gains to be extravagant. This should be based on net worth rather than income.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Net worth is good for talking about redistribution but for carbon emissions income is better. Emissions are largely based on consumption of fuel for cars and planes, meat, energy for climate control of homes ( the larger the home the more energy needed) etc. Consumption is correlated to income level, not net worth. You could inherit a home worth half a million which might put you in the top 1% globally in net worth but if you're only making $60,000 a year you're consumption isn't going to be near a person who makes $150,000 a year but has a lower net worth because they spend it all and have no savings.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I agree, as long as all sources of income are being considered, mostly meaning capital gains, which the article is pretty vague so I’m not sure where they’re getting their income data.