Just 1% of people are responsible for half of all toxic emissions from flying.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Banning it for non essential needs isn’t when we’re facing a climate crisis that will displace millions (if not billions in the long run).

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is when it’s not a realistic solution and there are other ways of achieving better outcomes with a greater return on investment of time and resources.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How do you think people lived until 70 years ago? You made the choice to move far from your family, that’s a consequence that comes with that choice and you still wanting to see them means you’re ready to shift the consequence of your choices on the people who will suffer the most of climate change.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            70+ years ago people just accepted the fact that living far from their family meant they wouldn’t see each other and they would need to communicate by mail.

            The fact is you live a long distance from your family, it’s your problem and those who will be affected by climate change the most shouldn’t have to pay for it and if it’s so important to see your family then you should move back.