• Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    I dunno, read again?

    I explained things pretty well in my original post. If you have questions or trouble understanding, I’d be happy to explain.

    • the_q@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s ok if you’re a fan of hers, but her carbon footprint is much more impactful than a regular individuals. Paying into a carbon offset account actually doesn’t offset anything. It’s PR at best. The environmental damage she does just by flying to get lunch is outrageous.

      • Lauchs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        I listened to her music voluntarily for the first time earlier this year, not my style.

        That being said, paying into a carbon offset is the best way to advance a regime that actually transitions us to a green economy.

        Are you a vegan who doesn’t have a car and won’t have children? That’s the best way to reduce your emissions. If not, are you as similarly unethical? And if it’s a scale issue, given the fact she makes so many people happy as evidenced by their willingness to pay seemingly infinite dollars to see her, well, I’m curious as to whether you feel you think you make a fraction of as many people happy?

        It’s easy to pile upon the rich but compared to most of the world, you are the Taylor Swift of the world. So these “no no, she costs a thousand times more!” Arguments don’t really hold, medium income westerner is responsible for a boatload more emissions than a poor third worlder, so why shouldn’t you be held to a similar nonsensical standard? At least Swift is contributing to the things that help us, what similar contributions have you made?