this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
426 points (99.5% liked)

World News

55432 readers
3071 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bassad@jlai.lu 90 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Please begin to restrict fuel for private jets, even if it would be symbolic

Edit : thanks for correction

[–] 8oow3291d@feddit.dk 45 points 6 days ago (5 children)

Eh. My impression is that most civilian air travel is not truly necessary. Tourism, and stuff that can be done with remote work.

I worry about stuff like food prices for the poor. Somebody not being able to fly on vacation - not so much.

[–] SpeedRunner@europe.pub 37 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

If anything, they should limit fuel for private jets first. If we're talking luxury - that's were it is.

Not with some poor old chap squished like a sardine inside a Ryanair flight.

That would do a lot more for the environment and for fuel savings.

I would love to get on a train and arrive well rested into Amsterdam overnight. Unfortunately, we're not there yet. Hopefully this crisis might speed up more efficient means of transport and reduce tax credits for airline fuel.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Nah, they are just gonna subsidize kerosene with tax payer money and call it a day.

[–] nullify3112@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (7 children)

I’m thinking of a scenario of a dying family member and not being able to make it to them before they pass away.

Flying isn’t just for business or tourism. But at the same time, people have had the luxury to be able to live far in distance from their families and friends, because it might just be a short flight away.

In California, I’ve heard of people working in Silicon Valley and living in Burbank, flying every day to go to work or maybe twice a week.

That luxury needs to stop. But it should not happen all of a sudden.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

He did say most

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 13 points 5 days ago

Have they Tried APPEASING Trump even More to Convince him to END the War? BABYING Trump seems to HELP a Lot!

[–] gigachad@piefed.social 26 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It's always the unexpected things that fight climate change.

Obligatory fuck politico

[–] UnimportantHuman@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 days ago

Remember COVID?

[–] yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 23 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Good. The flight industry as it exists today must disapear.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 34 points 6 days ago (6 children)

Yes, let billionaires fly and the rest of us should stay on the continent we're born on.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Most flights are short haul flights lasting from 1 to 3 hours. Commersial flights could very well be replaced by highspeed trains.

Changing how commersial flights are done does not mean "lets make it impossible for normal people to fly"

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)

There is far too much trivial flying for business, and people are flying while avoiding better ways to transport.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Lol business people won't care if the costs go up. They already pay extra to be able to sleep on their Intercontinental flights to go drinking "for business".

It'll be you and I who won't be able to go on vacation anywhere that requires crossing a major body of water.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You would think business learned during COVID that in person fly-away meetings were a waste of time and money.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago

They are, but business people like appearances and micromanagement even more than they like cost-cutting.

If the CEO's private jet fuel got more expensive, just lay off some employees, duh.

[–] bridgeburner@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There might be better transportation, but it is more costly. Just take germany for example, it is usually a lot more expensive to travel using long-distance trains than it is to travel by airplane. And not forgetting all the stress you get by travelling with the Deutsche Bahn cos their trains are literally only 60% of the time on time. And that's not including cancelled trains, lol.

[–] nlgranger@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

it is usually a lot more expensive to travel using long-distance trains than it is to travel by airplane

That's because kerozene is tax free contrary too every other energy source.

[–] rwrwefwef@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Emissions reductions don't really care from which class they came from.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 6 points 5 days ago

Exactly and there's more of us than there are billionaires, so our emissions need to be cut while they can keep on doing whatever the fuck they want. And THAT is never going to sit well with most people.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Boats have gotten much faster.

And they said "as it exists today" presumably meaning how often/common it's used.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

So we might get more sleep? Good.

Background: since we moved here, the local airport expanded more and more. They got permission to fly between 22:00 and 06:00 against a lot of local resistance, and host a load of old and extra noisy freight planes.

[–] roserose56@lemmy.zip 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

God bless USA and it's president! For starting a real war! Should we starve? Yes we should, as the war not only brings a win, but also money! Thanks Lord for the president you have given us!!! Let's all starve! /S

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 5 points 5 days ago

Trump fixes the climate change problem.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 days ago

A whole 40 flights? I think you will be surprised to learn that during the Long Emergency that humanity will face, we'll be lucky to have 40 flights a year, total for the planet!

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

Reduce EU domestic flights and use the high speed rail network for the short to medium distances.

[–] hemmetti@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Great news!

[–] Jaberw0cky@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Well this is the upside of the war. Transport causes pollution so less transport is better for the planet. Similarly most human economic activity is bad for the environment. I think we could do to have a lot less of it. It will give us cave to focus on the important stuff, food, clean water and reading books at home by candlelight on an evening.

load more comments
view more: next ›