Exactly whom does this guy think is using all of the product that these 100 corporations are creating? He's an idiot who doesn't understand the big picture.
.
I't observatory malpractice for me to not point out the irony that this guy was almost certainly using products from those 'evil corporations' while he wrote that tweet.
There are competitive markets everywhere. For each of those 100 companies, you could very likely find an alternative for most of them. You don't have to stop using all of them to be effective. Even not using one of those companies is better than using all of them.
Bonus: Ink cartridges cost pennies to make and are sold for upwards of $50-100. Not completely relevant, but I felt the urge to share it.
Not really. You can't buy an ethically sourced cellphone, or car, or use a hospital that has ethically sourced medical equipment. Everything you do has exploitation attached to it, and there's nothing you can do about it.
You can buy more ethically sourced things and minimize your usage of unethically sourced things. I don't understand your logic. "We can only save 1000 of the 1,000,000 kids, so it's not worth saving any of them." Just because you can't do it all doesn't mean you can't do some. It sounds like you're making justifications for your bad habits in an attempt to make them seem normal. Like the obese person blaming their genetics.
Right, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm not saying you shouldn't minimize your footprint, I'm saying that your impact is extremely small compared to what a major pollutant can, and should, do. Should the onus be on the individual consumer to better regulate their own environmental impact? Yes. Should the major corporations, who contribute much more to the issue also do more? Yes. What I was saying is that we live in a consumerist society that creates a culture of the cheap over the right, and holding the individual person accountable over the producers isn't fair.
It is absolutely fair. If the individual person just stopped using certain products or at least consume less of them, producers would have to change their ways... if they can not make money they would have to react to still be able to make money... the market IS the whole of individual consumers. So your choices really do matter: you got to start somewhere.
Have you heard of fairphone btw? It has some problems but I think their concept could be an example for bigger companies.
The problem is that 99% of the American population is worthless fucks that don't give a shit about anything and could be told that coco cola was murdering employees and wouldn't give a shit the next day and be perfectly happy ignoring that fact and going on with their lives like it's not happening
Although I feel that 99% is too high of a percentage I would say that the same goes for europeans and maybe also for the rest of the world.
"WhOo cAreS what hapPeNs in 50 yEars oR so I'Ll Be dEad bY thEn anyWaYs" (probably from cancer, radiation, war, diabetes, or shot by their infant child...)
But the 1 percent (hopefully more) still does make a difference...
there is a saying in Germany: "Kleinvieh macht auch Mist" which literally translates to "small lifestock also craps" and means that little steps will eventually lead to success.
Just don't give up yet.
PS: Coca Cola does murder employees. People do ignore that fact.
Exactly, that is what happened in Columbia with people that were labor unionists working for the coca cola company: www. theguardian.com/media/2003/jul/24/marketingandpr.colombia
That's Colombia. Saying someone used a paramilitary group for profit is just another Tuesday there tho I'm not at all surprised it never made it to American new tv
Look... I am on your side! I am saying that this is proof that you are right! People are worthless. People do not give a flying fffck out anyone except themselves. It was in the news in 2003. Nobody cared! Patriotism, Iraq war, War on Terror, freedom fries, Coca Cola!
Except it's not. They're suggesting what you CAN do. What you can't do is control those 100 Corps. I mean, if you could then sure, I'd agree that this would probably be journalistic malpractice
Yeah! This guy's stupid, just because we're not the worst doesn't mean we can't do an effort. That's still 1/3rd of the problem after all, it's not nothing.
Meat production is one of the largest polluters because of the amount of energy required to raise animals, feed them, slaughter, package and transport. There's A LOT of CO2 behind just one piece of steak.
Okay excellent I’ll catch the bus from Australia to Germany. Sounds good
.
I't observatory malpractice for me to not point out the irony that this guy was almost certainly using products from those 'evil corporations' while he wrote that tweet.
Bonus: Ink cartridges cost pennies to make and are sold for upwards of $50-100. Not completely relevant, but I felt the urge to share it.
Have you heard of fairphone btw? It has some problems but I think their concept could be an example for bigger companies.
"WhOo cAreS what hapPeNs in 50 yEars oR so I'Ll Be dEad bY thEn anyWaYs" (probably from cancer, radiation, war, diabetes, or shot by their infant child...)
But the 1 percent (hopefully more) still does make a difference...
there is a saying in Germany: "Kleinvieh macht auch Mist" which literally translates to "small lifestock also craps" and means that little steps will eventually lead to success.
Just don't give up yet.
PS: Coca Cola does murder employees. People do ignore that fact.