You don't let a murderer go free just because he is poor. Developing countries should pay for their crimes.

It's not actually a crime to emit co2, or..more broadly, to destroy the planet. Step one would have to be to make it so, before you could make anyone "pay" for it.

Quote:You don't let a murderer go free just because he is poor. Developing countries should pay for their crimes.

Good thing this is nothing like committing murder and improvising poor countries and mindless retribution isn't a solution to the problem. Working together within each countries means is.

(January 17, 2023 at 9:44 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It's not actually a crime to emit co2, or..more broadly, to destroy the planet.  Step one would have to be to make it so, before you could make anyone "pay" for it.

Also, punishment isn't a solution to the problem.

(January 17, 2023 at 8:30 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: At least 73% of funding should come from developing countries($44 trillion)

Should? That's a strangely precise recommendation. Do statistics like this just come shooting out of your ass, unbidden?

It really doesn't matter if it's accurate or not. In premise the idea we solve climate change by punishing poor countries by making them poorer to the benefit of no one. Is just silly.

It's accurate..ish. Our new friend is exaggerating, but there's no real need. About 50% of the problem with emissions comes down to just three countries. The us, china, and india. China and India are lumped in as developing countries, and along with the middle east, africa, latin america, and most of asia....are collectively responsible for about 60-70%.

Truth is, we won't have a solution to the problem unless that solution is applicable to and accessible by those developing nations - as we can't credibly insist that others cannot do what we did to enhance the lives of their citizens - to bring them out of poverty, starvation, and illness....nor could we practically solve the issue by making anyone pay for carbon. That's just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. The carbon is still being produced.

Helios brings up a crucial point. Impoverishing people doesn't make them cleaner. If it did, it would be hard to understand those emissions, eh? The same is broadly true with any infraction against any law, real or proposed. It's unclear how preventing people from getting or keeping a good job would reduce criminality - and as far as we can tell it doesn't (rather the reverse). Why we would want to apply a punitive model that has already failed us in the miniscule lane of human criminal justice to the herculean task of global repair and international diplomacy is beyond me. Perhaps our new friend could explain, as he sees it, what effect Making Them Pay™ would have on the climate crisis? Where would these funds come from, and where would they go to?

(January 17, 2023 at 9:11 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: That doesn't make any sense. Developing countries emit 73% of CO2. Destruction of environment is a serious crime. Of course they should be punished and pay for harm they caused.

you are are shining example of how christianity not only make people stupid, ignorant and infantile, but vile and wicked as well.

(January 17, 2023 at 9:44 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It's not actually a crime to emit co2, or..more broadly, to destroy the planet.  

Huh? So if billions of people will die due to global warming it's not a crime? What is it then?

(January 17, 2023 at 10:08 am)Angrboda Wrote:

(January 17, 2023 at 8:30 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: At least 73% of funding should come from developing countries($44 trillion)

Should?  That's a strangely precise recommendation.  Do statistics like this just come shooting out of your ass, unbidden?

They should pay their fair share. Developing countries emit 73% of CO2. Are you denying this basic fact?