this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
681 points (77.9% liked)

World News

39110 readers
2609 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Screwthehole@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

100 corporations contribute 71% of all emissions, and I'm supposed to stop eating the pork I bought from a local farmer? Fuck that noise!

[–] N0_Varak@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those 100 corporations make materials that everyone else uses (mostly O&G) and the consumption and use of those materials (by we the consumers) is responsible for 71% of GHG emissions.It's not just 100 companies burning coal for funsies

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I've argued both angles before, and I think reality is somewhere in the middle. Companies produce things because people want those things. But that doesn't mean companies are producing them in the most sustainable way possible. Electricity from coal has a significant difference in emissions if you scrub the flue gas vs if you don't change it at all. We can force companies to be more sustainable while providing their product.

[–] renownedballoonthief@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tyson is one of those corporations. Now go sit in the idiot corner until you learn to think.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Tyson foods is not what we would consider a " local farmer ". There are many hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands of local farmers around the world who do grow and raise animals for market.

Since the guy you responded to mentioned a local farmer, one would assume that he is buying from a smaller probably family farm who are raising animals on a much smaller scale than the feed lots that the big agribusinesses run.