RandAlThor@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.ml · 1 year agoRichest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report sayswww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square45fedilinkarrow-up1418arrow-down111cross-posted to: socialism@lemmy.mlworldnews@lemmit.onlineglobalnews@lemmy.zipnews@hexbear.netnews@beehaw.orgworld@lemmy.worldfinance@beehaw.orgeconomics@lemmy.mlenvironment@beehaw.org
arrow-up1407arrow-down1external-linkRichest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report sayswww.theguardian.comRandAlThor@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.ml · 1 year agomessage-square45fedilinkcross-posted to: socialism@lemmy.mlworldnews@lemmit.onlineglobalnews@lemmy.zipnews@hexbear.netnews@beehaw.orgworld@lemmy.worldfinance@beehaw.orgeconomics@lemmy.mlenvironment@beehaw.org
minus-squareDizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoLess kids means less money spent and more money saved in the long run, so yeah.
minus-squareinterdimensionalmeme@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoSo kids have négative value?
minus-squareDizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoDepending on who you ask, yes.
Less kids means less money spent and more money saved in the long run, so yeah.
So kids have négative value?
Depending on who you ask, yes.