• thejml@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Sure, I would love to work from home. Please convince my and everyone else’s employers of that.

    But the driving slower thing… people will do a quick calculation: take 5 min longer and save 10 cents in gas? Nah, time is money!

  • artyom@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Great, can they call my employer and tell them that I need to work from home to save the environment?

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    People fell for that line in the 1940s, at that time it had some effect too. It’s total bullshit in 2026.

    • Akasazh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Or to curtail big business. Somehow the whole pollution and energy use thing is the consumers onus.

      It’s almost never big business or billionaires with private jets that are called upon to be more frugal.

      • pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Water conservation. 80% of water use in CA is agricultural, i.e., Big Ag. Consumers are told to take 60 second ahowers, while water intensive crops like alfalfa are grown on land with senior water rights sold to foreign interests like Saudi and UAE who aren’t stupid and have money. The state has a water crisis because it won’t involve the heaviest abusers in the solution.

      • Zagorath@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Historically, it has ties to the oil industry. It has pivoted more towards green energy recently, but their interests are still in the production of energy, rather than in achieving the best outcomes for our cities.