A new article by the New York times insists that contrary to popular belief, the more wealthy and prosperous a nation is the more ecologically friendly they become. It presumes that as a country develops and industrializes it adapts cleaner forms of energy and living practices which amount to less environmental impact. Apparently this author has no interest in statistics.

12% of the worlds population reside in America where 60% of the world energy is used. In the process they cause 53 times the environmental damage as average Chinese person, 35 times as much as an Indian person etc.

If everyone was as technologically advanced as the US we would be monumentally more screwed then we are now, and this isnt because technology is bad, rather its because its poorly managed and commonly stifled for the purpose of profit and industry. This is because the scientific trajectory towards the developing efficient ways of living is impeded by the market industrial complex, which amounts to a restriction of clean energy for the sake of profit. It may be that we move to cleaner forms of energy as we become more advanced, but we end up using 30 times as much. So in reality our lack of moral progress isnt conducive to this argument. Published by the same media agency who staunchly defends a unified taxation regime in order to ration fossil fuels, the New York Times is telling people its ok to have your cake and eat it too. All we have to do is get the rest of the world consuming like we do and everything will be ok!!! RIGHT!!! In their attempts to reconcile the fake oppressive economic system with the very real environment Ziovision insists that its developing countries who need to start consuming 30 times more clean energy in order to save the planet. Never will you see the media promoting reduced consumption, the green movement simply migrates our addiction into other economical viable markets.

The following video debunks the absurd suggestion that the more refined consumer is better for the environment.