this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
127 points (100.0% liked)

Futurology

1784 readers
125 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ni@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well yes, I wonder if they had a plan beyond the statement.

[–] Ni@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exxon produces less than 3% of the world's daily crude demand and in May its shareholders overwhelmingly rejected calls for stronger measures to mitigate climate change.

[–] anonionfinelyminced@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"It's those darn shareholders! Our hands are tied!"

[–] Ni@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Seems like the reasoning they are going with. Really we need to make it somehow more profitable to do the right/climate focused things.

[–] zagaberoo@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not that it's a good excuse, but isn't that true? Investors ultimately elect executive management.

The abstraction between investor ownership and company management is one of the most damaging structures ever built.

[–] anonionfinelyminced@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] Sabata11792@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I would say they are planning on paying Congress to increase the cap. Not that we will survive till 2050