Darwin was said to have a circular path in his garden that resembled a trench it was so well-worn.

The 96 million members of the CCP and the entrepreneurs incentivised to make decisions based on the policies they introduce?

Who are the decision makers in western democracies?

I'm being slightly facetious - there are many answers to these questions.

The one that actually matters to me though is "do the people that are making the decisions do so in the interests of society?" Not in my 'democracy', that's for sure.

i mean why are 96 million ppl not afraid of future like western countries.

And good for the people of China presumably.

If I remember correctly, US per capita CO2 footprint is around 14 tonnes (this includes industrial activity). Average US driver of an ICE vehicle produces around 4 tonnes of CO2 per year.

Personal choices matter.

I think the second half of your argument is missing. How much of that CO2 emission is even in my control? What is capital doing to reduce its end of output? What sort of mechanisms do I even have to control the economy? I can't stop american companies from selling out my grandkid's future. My parents couldn't either. Our economy is simply not structured to reflect collective interest. If you vote for a political party that does want to take this seriously, you get accused of supporting fascism.

I'm not going to sweat recycling while our entire political economy makes a farce of caring about the future.

If you drive an ICE vehicle in the US, about 4 tonnes. He just told you that.

I can't do anything about that because I can't go back in time and force our country to build public transit. It's not my fault that the country is so ass-backwards we can't move rationally.

> If you care about the environment, BY FAR the most important thing you can do is reducing your carbon footprint.

And by FAR the most effective way to do that for the average person is to drive less.

Most people have no idea how far they need to drive to produce 1kg of CO2 (even though it's widely advertised alongside fuel efficiency).

Exactly.

Which, when you think about it, shows that the 'Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb' argument for this war is not exactly the true motivation (not to say that the US and Israel really don't want them to have a bomb).

This war is about trashing Iran. Adding it to the string of other failed states in the area. It would be more honest for Trump and Netanyahu to say that the motivation for this war is to ensure that Iran becomes a state that is incapable of developing the bomb (i.e. a failed and fractured, or weak and compliant).

Yes, the war is about Israel extreme far right removing an obstacle for their crazy expansionist ideas and about keeping America hegemonic power in the region.

It's worth remembering that the Iranians have as yet never claimed that the strait is mined. They have said that it may be. A lot of reporting misses this and assumes (perhaps deliberately) that the presence of mines is a fact.

But of course Iran doesn't need mines to enforce the blockade. They have drones and missiles that can be operated safely from 100's of kilometres away. They have anti-ship sea-skimming missiles. Not to mention the very large fleet of small armed fastboats.

I think the question is about bitcoin mining power and now actual mines

Ha! You would be right. My mistake.

Just to be clear, Iran has been accused of the attack.

No. But I would tell anyone involved in a genocide to. In my opinion that now includes the US and UK.

Others will have different opinions, obviously, but this is mine.

Great, that is not an uncommon stance. Respectable in my opinion.

Now, cutting friends and family off over something this just means you do not want to tolerate people with differing views and opinions on this.

It's more about the side you are on rather than some abstract moral argument against working for companies tangentially related to the defense sector.

"defense" sector. Listen to yourself.

Yes, that’s how language works.

But feel free to petition literally all countries to remove words like defense or security from the names of their militaries.

Makes you wonder if less public debt and less focus on growing cash crops to service that debt might actually make for a more comfortable 'simple agrarian life' overall. Even if this meant lower GDP.

I've often thought there's something wrong with the way we put a simple dollar figure on poverty. Less than $3 dollars a day with or without easy access to land, shelter, and fresh water?