It seems to me that the wealthiest 10% of the population are doing about 90% of the polluting. They drive yachts, they fly private jets (and more commercial flying than middle class and poor), they have more cars (manufacturing pollution), they drive more miles (more pollution), they tend to have nonproductive/luxury type professions (movies, television, or executive positions), and they tend to have much larger houses (5,000, 6,000, 15,000 square feet), etc. The list goes on and on.
The carbon footprints of the wealthiest 10% of the population are HUGE, yet there is NO pressure from the left to tax them more for their polluting behaviors. There is NO pressure from the left for them to simply STOP polluting as much. There is NO call for movie stars, for example, to live in smaller homes and give up their jets. Why not?
shortstop — that doesn’t make sense. Rich people use fireplaces more than poor people, and they use them for pleasure (sometimes with multiple fireplaces in one home). Rich people do buy more cars, which is WORSE, because the pollution caused in the manufacturing of a new car is FAR worse than the pollution created in keeping a 5 or 10 year old car on the road for another couple of years. People who drive new cars every year are BIGGER polluters, not smaller.
Mike – sure, I can see the math numbers. However, before anyone has the gall to tell me I have to spend 00 on a new furnace, I want the multi-millionaire to live in a 1500 square foot house. See what I mean? I may have a furnace from 1985, but I heat under 1500 square feet. Some guy with a 2007 high-tech furnace heating a 10,000 square foot house is FAR WORSE THAN ME!
Fluvial — I don’t think the movie stars are responsible for most pollution. I think that a movie star, however, is responsible for WAY MORE than me, you, and anyone else who is of middle or lower class. Therefore, before someone tells me I have to put on a new roof, re-insulate the place, and spend 00 on a new furnace, I want THEM to not live so extravagantly.
Fluvial — yes, I understand that ExxonMobil had the biggest profits in history. One thing is for sure, though, is that ExxonMobil performs a necessary service. Without ExxonMobil, our cars won’t run. Being a movie star, or Al Gore, is a luxury.
Plus, I’m just talking about bearing disproportionate burden. If I earn a modest income, drive a modest car, and live in a modest house, why should I have to revamp my HVAC system before Al Gore, or Cheryl Crow? Why should I ever get rid of my SUV before John Travolta gets rid of his 5 airplanes parked in his front yard?
Belladonna — the line is simply drawn at — "how dare John Travolta tell me to stop driving an SUV when he has 5 planes in his yard?" That’s my point, in a nutshell.