Yeah, I think we’re mostly on the same page about it not being as simple as “get rid of the rich and problem solved.”

Where I think we differ is that I see capitalism itself as probably the biggest hurdle. Not because people in capitalism are inherently bad but because the system’s incentives are fundamentally at odds with living sustainably. I don’t think changing that magically solves everything but I do think it’s a prerequisite for solving the problem in the long run.

I don’t think anyone is claiming that removing capitalism would magically make environmentally friendly choices effortless or eliminate human preferences for convenience. The point is that the system determines what gets treated as the “easy” and “cheap” option in the first place. If an economic system rewards short-term returns while externalizing long-term environmental costs, then of course the dirty option tends to win. That’s a structural issue, not a question of whether individual capitalists are cartoon villains. Physical constraints are real, but they’re not an argument for treating the current economic incentives as inevitable.

True and I was going to post something similar. One thing to keep in mind though is that the abolition of billionaires or more broadly speaking the capitalist class would enable the possibility of a totally different economy where profits are no longer the only goal. This could result in a more efficient way of doing things and therefore drastically reduce our negative impact on nature.

It’s done well.