UsernameHere

It has everything to do with the streaming service. Because they can’t sell as many prime memberships without it.

It’s not a bonus. They weren’t selling as many memberships as they wanted so they had to make the deal better by adding the service.

No streaming service. No membership.

It wasn’t “tacked on” because Amazon is generous. They did the math and decided it would help them make more profit by selling more Amazon prime memberships.

No one feels they are owed. They feel it is not worth it to pay for ads.

How can it be a free trial if you’re paying for a membership? Just to make them more money by watching ads?

Your comment sounds like something a marketing team would say.

The individual carbon footprint approach does not force anyone to do anything. So those that do not want to will not make changes. That is why it won’t work. It requires 100% of the worlds population to just do the right thing.

If there is not political/legal action to force change, most people will not change.

A 72 year old soldier? Sus

Consumer greenhouse gas emissions are the smallest of all sources of emissions.

During the pandemic they had to choose between go remote or close up shop. They didn’t have much choice.

Seems that once Covid stabilized they’ve been trying to force everyone back.

This is why we can’t fix climate change by reducing individual carbon footprint. Because it requires 100% of the population taking it upon themselves to do the right thing and many individuals: -don’t care -don’t have the option

The reason we are getting affordable EVs now at all is because governments are intervening to develop the technology and infrastructure. That’s not due to individual action.

No one said consumers are free of all responsibility.

No one said “oh that Exxon, smh”.

Trying to fix climate change by reducing individual carbon footprint doesn’t work because there are a lot of people that:

1. don’t have the luxury of being able to not use gasoline or solar.

2. Don’t care

3. It requires 100% of the world population to take it upon themselves to do the right thing just to fix the smallest part of the problem.

Fixing it with voting/protest reduces emissions for everyone. The rich, poor, industrial emissions, commercial emissions. All emissions.

I’m vegan and have had many conversations trying to convince others to go vegan. The only thing I commonly hear is “where do you get your protein”?

I still don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

For me the argument is much easies, as I would do more or less fine with that law, as my lifestyle is already pretty low car.

This is my point. If we try to fix climate change by improving individual carbon footprint, there are some that can do it but many that can not, so it only reduces the greenhouse gas emissions for consumers that can afford it.

Because it is a systemic problem. Not a problem caused by consumer choice.

Consumers don’t care if they use a gas car or an EV as long as it does what they need it to do and it is affordable.

If we just focus on voting and protesting we can create a solution that reduces all emissions, industrial emissions, commercial emissions, consumer emissions, all reduced.