What exaggeration? From every corner I see environmentalists want us to be vegans, use public transit, and rely solely on wind and power creation.
All of this sustainable energy (wind/solar) and eliminating fossil fuels disproportionately hit the poor more than someone like me. Everything from creation to delivery will cost more with pointless sustainables like wind and solar.
Also, what about animal proteins and fats? Supposedly we should stop eating meat and go all vegan seeing as the price for bacon, pork, steak, and chicken seem to always keep going up.
I guess your definition of pauper is different than mine. If eating animal proteins daily, using modern appliances, being able to buy cheap goods, and driving a car makes me a 1%er than i'll take my wasteful ways. Public transportation is my impetus for improving myself in this world.
I'm all for more sustainable industry and living, but what annoys me greatly is when some rich oligarch tells us that we should start living more sustainably. Yet he flew from his third house in the south of France, in his private jet, to said conference to give the speech. Those scientists, politicians, and their associated cronies are never subject to the brunt of their legislative powers.
You'll especially never see a fortune 500 C-level exec taking the sustainable route when it comes to their living.
I'd be more inclined to take a lot of their positions if they actually practiced what the preached. A lot of what I actually see from these people is, "austerity for you and not for me." Why should I live like a pauper so my neo-feudal Lord can consume more nice things for less?.
Ugh, I can't stand people with that attitude. Ask them if they're comfortable with the government tracking everything they do, from phone conversations, to infrared monitoring of their house, and random photographing of them and their children going about their day.
If anything, the average American deserves whatever is coming to them for their apathy. It stinks, as it seems the only solution is to get out of the country. I don't want to be here when the rest of the world decides they want to sack Rome or when the Feds decide to go full 1984 on all of us.
Most people who are in college, shouldn't be attending. They aren't cut out for it (myself included). Once upon a time, most people didn't go to college and instead worked at a mill, factory, and the like when they graduated from high school. They were paid wages that helped keep them afloat as well as give them a good standard of living. This push towards a "service" economy has been nothing more than a cheap attempt to claim that manufacturing jobs aren't as good as white collar service ones. Service careers (including the almighty finance ones) should help service those who actually create things, IE industrialists and blue collar workers.
When you make everyone get a college degree for a dwindling supply of service jobs, you lower the quality of the degree program. STEM degrees are great because those who can't make it flunk. With humanities, so long as you parrot whatever talking point the professor is spouting you will get an A. If you offer a talking point that falls outside of the narrative the professor is pushing, good luck graduating. The humanities used to be the purveyor of rich boys and girls who weren't smart enough to cut it in the real sciences.
And finally, the quality of those liberal arts degrees has declined in a lot of colleges. Humanities degrees are nothing more than Marxist indoctrination diploma mills. The efficacy and not mention ROI on these humanity degree programs is questionable.
Why don't we clean up America's mediocre k-12 system first before we push kids into going to college to discover themselves to the tune of $20-30k per semester. Maybe promote American industry instead of allowing Wall Street to gut it?