for - quote / critique / question - Thus is the problem of Rich and Poor to be solved. The laws of accumulation will be left free; the laws of distribution free. Individualism will continue, but the millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor; intrusted for a season with a great part of the increased wealth of the community, but administering it for the community far better than it could or would have done for itself. - The Gospel of Wealth - Andrew Carnegie

quote / critique / question - Thus is the problem of Rich and Poor to be solved. The laws of accumulation will be left free; the laws of distribution free. Individualism will continue, but the millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor; intrusted for a season with a great part of the increased wealth of the community, but administering it for the community far better than it could or would have done for itself. - The Gospel of Wealth - Andrew Carnegie - The problem with this reasoning is that it is circular - By rewarding oneself an extreme and unfettered amount of wealth for one's entrepreneurship skills creates inequality in the first place - Competition that destroys other corporations ends up reducing jobs - At the end of life, the rich entrepreneur desires to give back to society the wealth that (s)he originally stole - If one had reasonable amounts of rewarding innovation instead of unreasonable amounts, the problem of inequality can be largely mitigated in the first place whilst still recognizing and rewarding individual effort and ingenuity

• for cancel culture
• comment
  • by cancel culture, what I mean here is that in cases of real emergency, culture has been canceled, as during the Covid crisis
  • If elites cannot voluntarily control their extremely high emissions, then it will be done by policy as their inability to do so can threaten the survival of organized human life itself as research on millionaire's emissions have demonstrated:
    • https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS2666791622000252&group=world

• for: wealth inequality, inequality, carbon inequality, elite emissions, 1% emissions, millionaire emissions
• According to a new study by tourism professor Stefan Gössling,
  • the millionaires will, within just a few decades, be responsible for almost three quarters of carbon dioxide emissions.

• for: high-SES, 1%, W2W, inequality, carbon inequality, elites, billionaires, millionaires, leverage point
• five high carbon emission areas of high-SES, HNWI, VHNWI
  • consumption
  • investor
  • role model within social networks
  • participants in organizations
  • citizens seeking to influence public policies or corporate behavior

Graph - millionaire emission growth vs remaining carbon budget - Note the year 2037 on this graph - This is when millionaire emissions exceeds remaining carbon budget

graph - millionaire numbers by region - 1990 - 2020 - 2050

Title: Millionaire spending incompatible with 1.5 °C ambitions Authors: - Stefan Gossling - Andreas Humpe

• Abstract

  • Research question

    • Growing evidence suggests that the wealthiest individuals contribute disproportionally to climate change.
    • This study considers the implications of a continued growth in the number of millionaires for emissions,
      • and its impact on the depletion of the remaining carbon budget to limit global warming to 1.5 °C (about 400 Gt CO2).
    • The study presents a model that extrapolates observed growth in millionaire numbers (1990–2020)
      • and associated changes in emissions to 2050.

  • Results

    • The share of US$2020-millionaires in the world population will grow from 0.7% today to 3.3% in 2050,
      • and cause accumulated emissions of 286 Gt CO2.
    • This is equivalent to 72% of the remaining carbon budget,
      • and significantly reduces the chance of stabilizing climate change at 1.5 °C.
    • Continued growth in emissions at the top
      • makes a low-carbon transition less likely,
      • as the acceleration of energy consumption by the wealthiest
      • is likely beyond the system's capacity to decarbonize.
    • To this end, we question whether policy designs
      • such as progressive taxes targeting the high emitters
    • will be sufficient.

// and if it is not sufficient, then what?