@RandAlThor@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.ml • 2 years agoRichest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report sayswww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square45fedilinkarrow-up1418arrow-down111cross-posted to: globalnews@lemmy.zipnews@beehaw.orgworld@lemmy.worldeconomics@lemmy.mlenvironment@beehaw.org
arrow-up1407arrow-down1external-linkRichest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report sayswww.theguardian.com@RandAlThor@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.ml • 2 years agomessage-square45fedilinkcross-posted to: globalnews@lemmy.zipnews@beehaw.orgworld@lemmy.worldeconomics@lemmy.mlenvironment@beehaw.org
minus-squareDizzy Devil DuckylinkfedilinkEnglish2•2 years agoLess kids means less money spent and more money saved in the long run, so yeah.
Less kids means less money spent and more money saved in the long run, so yeah.
So kids have négative value?
Depending on who you ask, yes.