Right. However I think the article is valid insofar as that the environmental problems caused by those 78% of corporations cannot be adequately addressed through end-consumer behavior. And that the impact of being "green" in your consumer behavior is quite negligble in the big picture.
Unfortunately the solution suggested by the article is the destruction of "intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures". How unoriginal. I was waiting for some scheme of energy/resource taxes which, if harsh enough, would surely influence the behavior of the 78% evil scary corporations.
Re:Forget Shorter Showers
by yummyfajitas on Sunday July 12, 2009 @05:11PM
(#700587)
I think you missed the point of my post. My point was that consumers produce 22% of pollution directly, and 78% indirectly.
Suppose I contribute 22 tons of pollution by driving my car, and GM contributes 78 tons of pollution building the car. Therefore, if I don't buy the car, pollution only drops by 22 tons!
This analysis ignores the fact that if I won't buy a car, GM won't build it (reducing pollution by 100 tons).
[1] I realize that some businesses are several transactions away from serving consumers directly. Doesn't change the point that all business exists to produce stuff people want.