this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
89 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10137 readers
692 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Misinformation is not welcome here.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Even climate change as a problem is largely driven by the oligarch class. The working class would have been alright driving the smaller cars used to drive in the 2010s, and would have likely been okay climate action even in the late 80s. Especially since the cost would have been much lower if action was taken at that time.

That is if the oligarch class did not wage relentless propaganda on climate change science and any solutions, instead promoting the fossil fuels industry which they own.

[–] walktheplank@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If climate change info was pushed like the hole in the ozone layer/acid rain during the same time period people would be totally on board. It would be normal by now.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The changes necessary to mitigate acid rain and the ozone hole didn't threaten existing oligopolies.

Acid rain was "easy" to solve by shipping production overseas (which benefits the rich, since production costs go down), slapping scrubbers onto emitters (whose costs could be passed on to consumers via fees or tax breaks), or changing the formulation of stuff getting burned. The rich stayed rich without changing their business model.

AFAIU, CFCs (and other ozone depleting compounds) had analogs that were relatively easy to use without changing processes. Once again, no yachts were harmed in the making of that solution.

Addressing climate change means we have to change how we do everything: transportation, agriculture, and manufacturing. Even band-aid solutions like EVs and renewable power require minor change and are getting a shit tonne of pushback. Doing the hard work necessary to keep our climate stable (and avoiding possible extinction) would invalidate a bunch of business models.

Hence the resistance.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

No yachts were harmed in the making of that solution.

👏

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I totally agree.