• deaf_fish@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    20 days ago

    For the average person, yes, but that’s nothing compared to what a single stroke of a CEO’s pen can do.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      Companies supply products to people.

      If there were not 8 billion people buying shit and going places the stroke of that CEO won’t do as much damage.

      Also if 8 billion people want a car to go on vacation to the beach… it doesn’t matter if the pen of the car manufacturing company belong to a CEO or a People’s Delegate, world is going to shit regardless.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        Companies decide themselves what products to supply, how they are created, what materials are used, how they are packaged, how much they are transported, …

        And all of those decisions only take money into consideration.

        That is not on the consumer.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          If you want a car, a car has to be made. If you want to drive, energy needs to me used.

          There’s a limited amount of damage reduction that can be done with a change in the economical system.

          And I’m for ending capitalism. But it would be naive to thing that without capitalism everything will be fixed. Some things will be better, but most bad things will remain a problem.

          No matter what economic system you try to make. There’s no place in the world for 8 billion cars. And I use car a an example, but every item or service we use needs some resources. Even if we are top efficient about how we made them… It’s still not enough with 8 billion people wanting the same.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 days ago

        It’s kind of like asking whether the vital piece of a table is the tabletop or the legs, when you don’t have a functional table without either one. We don’t have a functional market system without supply and demand.

        In a weird way, blaming the corporations is philosophically aligned with supply-side dogma, where the corporations (“job creators”) have an intrinsic motivation to produce. As if they just churn stuff out all day long, because that’s what they do when the government doesn’t get in their way, and it’s the duty of people to consume so the output doesn’t all just pile up in some great heap outside the factory.

        There’s a reason some call that “voodoo economics.” Whatever their influence today, all corporations producing things evolved in a symbiotic relationship with consumer demand. We could guillotine all of the CEOs, and revoke every corporate charter, but it’d do jack for the environment, unless unless we also all change our lifestyle.

        Blaming the corporations makes as much sense as them blaming us. It’s time to move past who’s to blame, and instead start fixing things.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          We could guillotine all of the CEOs, and revoke every corporate charter, but it’d do jack for the environment, unless unless we also all change our lifestyle.

          without those companies, the lifestyles would necessarily change.