Deme

Yes, sorry I really should've sat down and done that to begin with.

Billionaires’ lifestyle emissions dwarf those of ordinary people, but the emissions from their investments are dramatically higher still —the average investment emissions of 50 of the world’s richest billionaires are around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined.

Well, there it is.

Edit: If there were 8 billion Amazon corporations, we would've shot past Venus a long time ago. The 90 minute mark seems to correspond to this. Getting rid of fifty (number of billionaires examined in the study) superyachts and a hundred 24/7 flying private jets would be next to nothing compared to the emissions from wider economy which they control, but which wouldn't go away when the guillotine does its thing.

I would be interested in seeing the methodology behind that figure. If Jeff Bezoz's emissions include his ownership share of the emissions by the Amazon corporation (which is a major part of the world's logistical system at this point), then no doubt, but getting rid of old Jeff wouldn't eliminate those emissions. I rest my case that half of all fossil fuels in the world aren't going directly into their jets and yachts.

"how forestry has been handled for centuries in northern Europe"

Clear cutting is a relatively new thing. It worsens the damages to forest growth from both drier summers and bug infestations, as the clearings don't provide shade or trap humidity in any way, and leave the trees on the edges of the clearings vulnerable to drying, weakening and thus more susceptible to bugs. The homogenous composition of wood farms also makes things very easy for bugs. The Nordic forestry model needs to change to one of continual growth for the sake of preserving both biodiversity and the climate.

The super rich are definitely the most obscene offenders, but they are also a vast minority. Those fossil fuel companies in your second link aren't pumping oil and gas only for the sole consumption of the 0.1%. It goes into running the word economy, massively subsidising energy intensive and thus harmful activities. This in turn keeps prices artificially low all around.

Yes we should absolutely eat the rich, but we should also not pretend that the average middle class lifestyle could stay the same. Hell, the entire purpose of the middle class is to be the subset of the working class that is allowed the financial means to consume products and keep the economy growing to the benefit of the rich and to the detriment of all.

We should share what wealth we have better, and at the same time do with less.

Negative, yes, but increasing.

From the article in the OP:

Fifteen years ago, Sweden’s 87 billion trees, soils and wetlands absorbed almost 62 million tons of carbon each year—more than the country’s total fossil fuel emissions. But by last year, that number had halved to 31 million tons. The steep drop indicates that forests are disturbed by increased clearcutting as well as years of droughts, fires, beetle infections and insufficient soil nutrition, which hinders tree growth. It also means that Sweden risks being in violation of a range of EU agreements, including the union’s Nature Restoration Law, Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulation.

Full disclosure: Here in Finland we have it even worse.

That graph states out loud that it doesn't take into account emissions from land use changes. That's a massive factor for forested countries.

Also with post industrial countries much of all manufacturing emissions have been offshored away. Wealthy Nordic countries consume a lot of products built elsewhere and thus these graphs skew the picture a lot.

"neo-monarchist" "hardcore libertarian" I love it when people have coherent views which aren't self-contradictory.

Eti avain. Onko statsit kunnossa hiippailun ja taskuvarkauden suhteen?

Not if it can't spring off due to being pressed against the ground by the weight of the bird. I suspect that's part of the joke. Don't scare the bird.

Are you implying that he would be the most emotionally intelligent and empathetic animal on the planet, were it not for puberty?

They're definitely scheming something in the first panel.

Että noi mainostaulut kyllä vituttaa mua suunnattomasti. Mäkelänkadullakin idylliset, aikanaan säännöllisesti redditissä ihastelua herättäneet puiden varjostamat ratikkakiskotkin on nyt tahrattu noilla leditauluilla kummallakin puolen. Siellä ei kuitenkaan onneks revitty puita pois. Ostakaa kuluttajat, ostakaa lisää turhaa paskaa!