this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2024
106 points (98.2% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5244 readers
449 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I believe someone suggested loans collateralized on stock and other such speculative assets be taxed as realized gains, which should go a long way to stop the absolutely mindbogglingly obscene displays of mega wealth we've been seeing as of late.

As for income, there should be nominal brackets established at the 20th, 40th, 60th, 80th, 95th, and 99th percentiles of income for a given year, with 20th, 40th, and 60th percentile income taxed at the percent of national wealth each of those brackets owns, income in the 80th and 95th brackets being taxed at twice their respective shares of the national wealth, and income above the 99th income being taxed at three times their share of the national wealth. Then have a half a percent multiplier for every multiple of twenty times the median income of the 0-20 percentile bracket an income crosses.

Doesn't just tax the rich, it directly incentivizes them to spread the wealth to lighten the crunch on their top dollar. The rich literally can get their own tax cuts by not hoarding wealth.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

That tax structure is a really neat idea!

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 months ago

Not sure what this has to do with climate change aside from potentially make it worse ? Seems it would increase emsisions and GDP as "the poor" will spend it.

We need to all emit like the poor do now. I'd suggest instead they spend it on good quality free PT and AT (cycling infrastructure etc) so the poor don't need a car for example, immensely improving their lives and lowering emissions, pollution and heath care costs..

With less roads and parking they can infill with smaller, well insulated cheaper medium density housing, and trees and bushes, making many homes cheaper to live in as they don't need as much energy, this immensely improves the lives of the poor and reduces emsisions.

Giving "poor people" more money within the orthodox neo-liberal shit show will make anything climate or enviormentally adjacent worse. Taking it alll off the rich will help in spades but this is tokenism that won't help with emissions or biodiversity loss or plastic use etc.

That asdie, The Australian Green party went into the last federal election with a policy to tax the very wealthy much more but voters soundly rejected such policies, 75% voted againt it. I voted in the minority for it.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, some things just are.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Would you post the text here so we can read and comment on it?

I'm gonna guess it's saying it's in billionaire's long term interest in maintaining power to accept a tax.