If you really think the environment is less important than the economy ...

[dreamnightwind]

31. Hell, start with me

Nobody's less productive than me these days.

Not sure where you're coming from, though. Sometimes I miss the obvious, so forgive if that's the case.

Seems to me, though, that the poor generally have small carbon footprints, it would be more efficient to start at the top.

I'm mostly concerned about 2 different paths. One is inaction, resulting in catastrophic failure. That's the likely outcome. The other is the kind of solution that some of the elites are likely to come up with, which might be where you were coming from. I worry about them releasing a devastating virus that only the elites will get the shots to prevent. I don't know how likely this is, it's a rabbit-hole too scary to look into, at least for me.

What needs to happen is for capitalism to be either destroyed (per the kill the economy web site by the guy who is featured in the OP) or reworked so it can function well while rapidly contracting. Much of human activity, especially in the so-called first world, and manufacturing processes in the less developed world, has to either end or be transformed to produce a tiny fraction of its current environmental impact.

Depopulation by lowering the birth rate would work, although it would have to be a vast change and even then the environmental benefits of that change might not arrive before a climate tipping point is crossed. Seems like a good idea to me, though, there are way too many humans on this planet. This would also end up collapsing our economic system, I think, I doubt it could gracefully scale down that rapidly.

Current systems are built on the assumption of growth, not contraction. So that's a problem that needs a lot of attention, retooling our economy to survive and provide for its citizens while rapidly scaling the system down. I'm pretty sure nobody that matters is even working towards this, unfortunately.