=- Artificial News for Artificial Times -=
ARCHIVED! Sunsetting The Synthetic Times: After over a year, 8.000 plus articles, and more than 300.000 images, The Synthetic Times retires from active reporting. For now, it stays as an archive. It was fun while it latstet, but even AI eats energy and budgets. If you think the Synthetic Times should be alive, you are very welcome to support the project by ordering a fine art print, making a donation, or contacting us for sponsorship or other ideas!
Climate / 7 months ago
Top 1% Emit More Carbon Than Bottom 66%: They say money can't buy happiness, but it sure can burn the Planet!
image by stable-diffusion
Uncovering the shocking truth: The top 1% emit more carbon than the bottom 66%, exposing the dark side of extreme wealth and its impact on our planet.
We’ve always known that the filthy rich have a voracious appetite for Gucci, private jets, and caviar. But according to a new report, the titans of Planet Earth have another filthy habit. And it isn't munching on diamonds. Instead, it’s gobbling up carbon dioxide and belching it into our treasured atmosphere at a disturbing rate. They say money can't buy happiness, but it sure can burn the Planet! In fact, the top 1% of these Bollinger-swilling, Ferrari-driving, Mansion-dwelling high-fliers are responsible for more than twice the carbon emissions of the bottom half of the world's population. But hey, who's counting? Well, actually, Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute are. The dynamic duo recently published a study that places the blame squarely on the Armani suit-wearing shoulders of those who have made a profession out of flaunting their opulence. This study is the latest in a string of reports that shows how the ultra-wealthy are basking in decadence while Mother Earth is gasping and begging for a breather. By simply living their lives, the excessively affluent are reportedly causing our dear planet to generate an obscene amount of greenhouse gases. It's like the Earth's atmosphere is hosting a never-ending party, and it just can't handle the champagne popping anymore. It’s clear that the ultra-rich aren't shy about enjoying the finer things in life. Why settle for a Prius when you can tear up the road in a Bugatti Veyron or bounce around the world in a private jet as you choose from a range of cuisines sourced from various countries for your in-flight meals? All while the less fortunate are trying to figure out how to hoard enough cans to get them through the week. The problem, however, isn’t just the frivolous extravagance. “It’s the systemic issue about the unequal distribution of carbon emissions across society. The ‘polluter elite’ need to make dramatic lifestyle changes to keep global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius,” explained Tim Gore, Head of Climate Policy at Oxfam. Huh, another demand for the ultra-wealthy to tighten their Versace belts. What's next? Alienating them from their shoe collection? The gaudy emissions aren't purely due to the endless luxury purchases, either. Apparently, when not busy snapping up Cartier or converting medieval castles into summer homes, the super-rich are heavily invested in fossil fuel industries. Cause why not stick your silver spoon into every available pot of money, even if it's covered in oil? So, what does this mean? Should the 1% start exchanging their Lamborghinis for bicycles, swap caviar for lentils, and exchange golden penthouses for eco-friendly communes? Is it time they finally understood that their dripping wealth is dousing our Earth in a disparaging gloom of damaging carbon emissions? Or should we just accept that their happiness is tied not to the green of Mother Earth but to the green in their pocket? Well, if their gilded lives lead to our planet's doom, at least the rest of us had the pleasure of watching their Instagram stories. Sarcasm aside, our dear Earth could really use a break from the relentless hammering. Somehow, I doubt the mega-rich will be the first to give up their luxuries. I guess we'll all have to hold our breath for that miracle. Or maybe not, considering the surplus of CO2 in the air.
posted 7 months ago

This content was generated by AI.
Text and headline were written by GPT-4.

Trigger, inspiration and prompts were derived from a climate news feed

Original title: Richest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report says
exmplary article: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/richest-1-account-for-more-carbon-emissions-than-poorest-66-report-says

All events, stories and characters are entirely fictitious (albeit triggered and loosely based on real events).
Any similarity to actual events or persons living or dead are purely coincidental