• First of all to understand that the problem is not technology, but the systems we have. So the goal should be to either change the systems we already have or to create new ones. The common tools are:

      • ban bad technoligies. That would be something like a ban on internatl combustion engines or fossil fuel boilers
      • set up none capitalist structures to gurantee access to some technolgies. For example public health care for cancer medicin.
      • change planing priorities. That would be public funding for railways instead of car based infrastructure.
      • add hidden costs as real costs. Something like emissions pricing for example.

      A lot of this can be done on a smaller scale as well. Local councils are responsible for roads and therefore can turn parts of them into cycling infrastructure. Then you have stuff like cooperatives for utlities for example. They are run for the benfits of the members and not for Wallstreet. The key is to change the underlying system to make it better. There are plenty of threads here, which talk about individual solutions. Just go for a problem that you are intrested in and find a solution. Usually they can be fund and just have to be copied and adapted to local factors.

      Also important to say is that you are not going to fix the every problem in the world alone. Fixing one part of the problem is difficult enough and you have to trust that others will do the right thing as well.

      • You didn’t answer the question.

        ban bad technoligies.

        How? The niches for those technologies are created and maintained by those same people you want to do a complete 180 and ban-hammer them instead.

        set up non-capitalist structures

        How? Using your example you have to either manufacture and distribute said cancer medicine yourself. Which is a crime… And at they point it’s probably more effective to just straight up rob a pharmacy and redistribute, robin hood style. I hope I don’t need to go into detail how that’s not a real answer/solution…

        (Sidenote: https://fourthievesvinegar.org/ is very cool and doing some work in this sort of direction, but it should stand as an example of how complicated and largely inefective at scale that approach is.)

        change planing priorities.

        So go to approval hearings and throw a fit until you are arrested and they build the car based infrastructure anyways?

        add hidden costs as real costs.

        Oooh neoclassical economics!!! So how should I bill you for my time writing this comment?

        • How? The niches for those technologies are created and maintained by those same people you want to do a complete 180 and ban-hammer them instead.

          By lobbying the government. It happens a lot. For my example you have a list of gas boiler phase outs here and for fossil fuel cars here. Obviously this is far from easy, but a combination of lobbying, electing the right politicans and protests has worked. You can easily look up what exactly they had to do, to get it done, if you care.

          How? Using your example you have to either manufacture and distribute said cancer medicine yourself. Which is a crime… And at they point it’s probably more effective to just straight up rob a pharmacy and redistribute, robin hood style. I hope I don’t need to go into detail how that’s not a real answer/solution…

          Public health care as I said. That way you are not negotiating alone against big pharma, but form a monoploy in a given country, which is able to reduce costs a lot. To be fair most countries already have it, so it is mostly adapting it to work. Here is a little map of who already has it(the green ones):

          So go to approval hearings and throw a fit until you are arrested and they build the car based infrastructure anyways?

          For the most part you just go to the public hearings and calmly and nicely agrue your case. For the most part nobody cars, so you might be alone in them. As it is also on a local level, big fossil fuel often does not even turn up. You have to be aware that the project you argue to be better is not going to be improved much unless you are lucky. It is about the next one, where the planners actually start to incorporate your sugestions and propably badly. Then you turn up again and suggest something better. It takes a long time, but it has been done in a lot of different places.

          Oooh neoclassical economics!!! So how should I bill you for my time writing this comment?

          Thanks has to be enough. Seriously we have a capitalist system and that is a good way of stopping the bleeding.

          Anyway the solutions are out in the world. Not just the technology, but also for the most part the systems we need to implement them on scale. It is just a matter to spread them.

          • So to summarize your suggestions are:

            lobbying the government

            not negotiating alone against big pharma (lobbying again)

            Calmly and nicely agrue your case.

            we have a capitalist system and that is a good way of stopping the bleeding.

            Again, none of those answer the question. Those are all “do nothing and trust those with power and authority to do the right thing.” It’s the definition of useless liberalism and displays quite the level of privilege and disconnect from reality.

            You can easily look up how completely ineffective those solutions are, if you care. Did you even read the article this comment thread is posted under?