[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Maybe buy a few companies I really hate and just shut them down?

This might actually put a dent in the €5B :D all of the rest you listed is probably another 5% max.

€5B is an unfathomably large number

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Investments, trust funds, paying off debt and my mortgage. Set up enough in investments that I'll always have a million or so in post-tax interest income.

Conservatively, well call this 5% locked up

Trust funds and investments for my family so they have money coming in.

Not sure how big your family is, or how much you want to have them coming in, but well call this +5%

10% spent

Remodel my house. +0.1%

Rent a condo in Wrigleyville during the Cubs season. Rent a condo in Mesa during spring training. +0.01%

Open a bar or two. +0.1%

Hire a dietician/personal cook. +0.01%

Buy a handful of cars, the most extravagant would probably be a Catterham. +0.01%

Open an automotive shop to restore cars. I know that'll be a loss but it will be a good hobby for something I like to do. +0.1%

Travel a bunch. Follow the Cubs for a season and go to every game. +0.01%

Buy dual citizenship somewhere. +0.01%

Donate to AOCs campaign. +0.1%

Club 33 membership. +0.01%

Occasionally take private jets when I fly, but pick up families that are flying coach when I go and bring them along for free. It's no fun being alone. +0.01%

Do a bunch of the traditional billionaire things like go fishing on a private yacht. +0.1%

Finally not stress about going out to dinner. +0.001%

Now were to a whopping 10.571% "spent" with most of it invested in ways that will pay back entirely in your lifetime. What do you do with the other 4.5B?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

If it was directly analogous, people would have been denying that sickness happened at all, just like how there are far too many people who don't believe that climate change is happening.

I don't know that this is necessarily true - I can't speak to everyone, and there's always crazies who take things to the extremes, but most deniers I'm aware of don't deny that the climate is changing, they deny that it's caused by humans, and they doubt the forecasts.

I think we're, to a certain degree, past the days of bringing a snowball onto the Senate floor to disprove climate change, and into the "humans aren't doing this, the planet just goes through phases" denial, which is to a certain degree similar to people denying germ theory insisting instead it's just demons / God's will.

People are finally seeing and experiencing the record setting heat waves, polar vorteces, unprecedentedly early Cat 5 hurricanes, and rising sea levels, they just refuse to accept fault, or agree that it's worth sacrificing "the Economy" to try and stop it from getting worse.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago

I self host, and drop encrypted backups onto a cloud storage provider. If anything, cheap storage is going to cost me more because I'll be inclined to back more up.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Sooo I probably shouldn't hold onto any hope for that Gothic reboot we were promised?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Also, what portion of the decayed tree becomes soil. Sure some CO2 is released back out, but the net increase in soil over the tree's life is where the savings are.

Anaerobic vs aerobic decay is largely about the difference in short-term impacts. Anaerobic decay releases methane which is much more potent than CO2 in the short term, but naturally breaks down into CO2 over a hundred or so years, which is a long time for the generations of humans dealing with climate change, but a blip on the timescales of forests.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

Hard to fault them though, hard to imagine they are expecting high enough sales volume to drive the price down

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Agreed, kind of a bold assertion to throw out without proof against a highly rated international charity

Charity Navigator 4-star 99%

Guidestar Platinum

Charity Watch A-

Looks like there were some issues with transparency 5-10 years ago (Google "Pro Publica Red Cross"), but I'm not finding any recent follow-ups and they're scoring high marks for transparency now. They pretty consistently spend ~90% of every dollar donated on programs and are generally well-respected.

Are they a perfect charity? Probably not. But are they doing good? Absolutely.

If you want to donate money elsewhere, by all means go for it. Doctors Without Borders, and World Central Kitchen are great international charities, and local food banks in impacted communities can make your dollar go further than just about anyone else.

But also remember money isn't the only donation the Red Cross accepts - as with any major disaster, blood will be in short supply, and there is unequivocally no better network for blood donations than the Red Cross.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago
[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Something something paradox of tolerance. Something something hate speech.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

What kind of programs would benefit most from being ported to retro consoles?

Obviously Doom.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

I like impossible nuggs, and Gardein 7-Grain

22
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
42
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/3345069

Following up on an paper posted earlier this week on disproportionate carbon emissions based on income. This article, by one of the paper's authors, proposes the possibility of imposing carbon tax on investment income as a more equitable means of influencing emissions.

Instead of putting the responsibility for cutting emissions on consumers, maybe policies should more directly tie that responsibility to corporate executives, board members, and investors who have the most knowledge and power over their industries. Based on our analysis of the consumption and income benefits produced by greenhouse gas emissions, I believe a shareholder-based carbon tax is worth exploring.

70
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Following up on an paper posted earlier this week on disproportionate carbon emissions based on income. This article, by one of the paper's authors, proposes the possibility of imposing carbon tax on investment income as a more equitable means of influencing emissions.

Instead of putting the responsibility for cutting emissions on consumers, maybe policies should more directly tie that responsibility to corporate executives, board members, and investors who have the most knowledge and power over their industries. Based on our analysis of the consumption and income benefits produced by greenhouse gas emissions, I believe a shareholder-based carbon tax is worth exploring.

418
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
8
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
36
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
7
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
66
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
62
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
30
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
1
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
0
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
view more: ‹ prev next ›

RvTV95XBeo

joined 1 year ago