Class Warfare - Tumblr Posts
The richest 1% of humanity is responsible for more carbon emissions than the poorest 66%, with dire consequences for vulnerable communities and global efforts to tackle the climate emergency, a report says. The most comprehensive study of global climate inequality ever undertaken shows that this elite group, made up of 77 million people including billionaires, millionaires and those paid more than US$140,000 (£112,500) a year, accounted for 16% of all CO2 emissions in 2019 – enough to cause more than a million excess deaths due to heat, according to the report.
[...]
The Oxfam report shows that while the wealthiest 1% tend to live climate-insulated, air-conditioned lives, their emissions – 5.9bn tonnes of CO2 in 2019 – are responsible for immense suffering.
[...]
The report finds that it would take about 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99% to produce as much carbon as the richest billionaires do in a year.
Even if not acutely aware of it, everybody of working class status are at least vaguely aware they could just as easily become homeless.
But because of ignorance on the politics of it, many have a fear response and must create an illusion of separation, even other homeless people will sometimes do this. They say at least they're not like "those" homeless people that do substances or steal, etc. But they look at us all the same, wouldn't matter if you had uni degrees or job, if you look homeless, then they look at you the same as every other person on the streets.
Homelessness is the biggest threat the ruling class uses against the working class, the gov and non profits capitalize on and creates higher rates of homelessness, so they'll never do anything to rid society of homelessness ever.
Is there a quality control check on the kind of training police receive in the US? We the tax paying people have the authority to put down the rabid dogs down and send the rest to a different obedience school.. erm.. police academy. Or no? That isn't the way it works any more? And no one sent out the memo?
We are bidden to consider the hard case of some poor fellow who by dint of privation has contrived to buy a house just large enough to hold his family. And we are going to deprive him of his hard-earned happiness, to turn him into the street! Certainly not. If his house is only just large enough for his family, by all means let him stay there. Let him work in his little garden too; our “boys” will not hinder him–nay, they will lend him a helping hand if need be. But suppose he lets lodgings, suppose he has empty rooms in his house; then the people will make the lodger understand that he need not pay his former landlord any more rent. Stay where you are, but rent free. No more duns and collectors; Socialism has abolished all that! Or again, suppose that the landlord has a score of rooms all to himself, and some poor woman lives near by with five children in one room. In that case the people would see whether, with some alterations, these empty rooms could not be converted into a suitable home for the poor woman and her five children. Would not that be more just and fair than to leave the mother and her five little ones languishing in a garret, while Sir Gorgeous Midas sat at his ease in an empty mansion?
Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread (via probablyasocialecologist)
I can’t uderstand how at one point in time in my life I was working at a grocery store, surrounded by food, but starving and unable to afford half of it. It was only for a few months, but I still can’t make peace with it. I would see thousands of dollars pass through my till in an eight hour shift and yet I would walk away with so little I couldn’t afford meat or fresh fruits.
So anyways death to mega-corps and billionaires
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE,?
Submitted 12-31-2021. Found 1-2-2022.
them: SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST MEANS HUMANS MUST BE INDIVIDUALLY SELF-SUFFICIENT AND COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT
biologist:
