It is not blame shifting. I am saying that Capitalism has us emulating the
rich -- anybody richer than ourselves, regardless
of whatever level we are at as individuals. And the people in the 89th
percentile are driven to live like those in the 90th.
I'm not saying that the rich consume all that much (though we do) --
just that they teach us how we must live, or at least aspire to live.
And the person going to McDonald's is trying to upgrade the take-home
so they can go to someplace they see their higher income
neighbors going to.
Gene Coyle
Doug Henwood wrote:
> Eugene Coyle wrote:
>
> >Doug, you ignore the demonstration effect. What a Chez Panisse patron
> >does becomes the goal of the rest of us. The environment
> >can only be saved by stopping the rich from consuming more. And more.
> >And more. And more. And more.
>
> This is blame-shifting. It's like blaming "corporations" for
> pollution. If you live in a U.S. suburb and drive a car, your
> envinromental footprint is probably at the 90th or 95th percentile of
> the world population. It wouldn't surprise me if someone who lived in
> Berkeley and walked to Chez Panisse did less environmental damage
> than someone living in a distant suburb who drives to a McDonald's at
> the nearest mall.
>
> And while Brad may be pretty well off, a Berkeley professor isn't a
> very accurate embodiment of the U.S. "rich."
>
> Doug
