Gloomy
5 % of or, according to the article.
This is not proven at all. It's at best controversal.
Der verlinkte tweet spricht von 400 und 500 Gram, da hast du was durcheinander geworfen.
I like how this was your reminder. I mean, you just made a thread about this very topic...
How so? If the result is similar they are just different roots to the same outcome.
The main difference is that the resilience, or the ability of a child to cope with the abuse, may vary greatly between physical abuse, sexual abuse and psychological abuse (like what the article is talking about). So a single sexual abuse is much more likley to cause Trauma, then beeing yelled at once. But beeing yelled at for years? Beeing told that you are wortheles repeatedly? That is likley to cause a lot of harm, especially because it plants a sense of "not beeing good enoth" in you that can take a lot of work to overcome once grown up.
There is no need to rank diffent kinds of abuse against each other. We need to see them as equaly harmful for children and not trivialice them.
No. It's the System that encurages them to dog it out that is to blame. A System that is build around exponancial groth. Those 117 companies wouldn't dig or pump that stuff out, consumers wouldn't live lifes that use up extraordenary amounts of energy compared to any other time in human history, goverments wouldn't make the GDP their holy grail, if not for the hyper capitalist framework that has enabled this to happen.
So, it you have to blame something, blame the bloody System.
And, btw., don't use the "the companies are responsible" line to excuse not changing how you consume and how much you personaly continue. I am not saying that you are doing so, but I've read it to many times by now.
Yes, BP pushed the carbon footprint idea. Yes, BP and any other oil company has to do chance their buisness model. That does not mean that All of us will not have to degrow the way we live. Every one of us needs to start acting in a more sustainable manor, from Individual to company to government, if we want to minimise suffering for future generations. If we don't (and honestly it doesn't look like it) their will be a systematic reduction in complexity anyway. The only question is if it will be by design or by desaster.
Do add to this, there are some good Youtube chanels that do 40k Lore.
You are speaking truth, going vegan has one of the highest possible personal impacts. Eating animals is one of the main reasons for the massive land use, since we need it manly to feed animals, therefore it is reducing biodiversity.
Personaly, I don't think the second part of your comment is sensible. Beeing aggressiv and making accusations (even if warented) will not change peoples minds but make them defend themself. But again, that's just my view.
(edit to reword a sentence)
This is mostly on point, but it also reproduces the 100 companies 71% line.
100 corporations are responsible for 71% of emissions related to fossil fuel and cement production, not 71% of total global emissions.
Of the total emissions attributed to fossil fuel producers, companies are responsible for around 12% of the direct emissions; the other 88% comes from the emissions released from consumption of products.
It's unfortunately not true. Just widley quoted.
You can fuck right off with that attitude, mate.
/s
That's why most off them have to be "unlocked" first. Usually they need to be pushed inwards for a second and then they jjmp out and can be turned. It's realy just a regional thing between US and EU