(January 19, 2023 at 4:45 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:42 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Ok, let's say someone (I've no idea who) determines that Burundi owes $2 billion for its share of climate remediation. What happens when they don't pay?

Boru

Americans won't have to pay either

And how does that solve climate change?

Boru

(January 19, 2023 at 4:50 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:45 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: Americans won't have to pay either

And how does that solve climate change?

Boru

Why should it solve climate change? As I said global warming will be net beneficial to the Global North

(January 19, 2023 at 4:40 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 3:50 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Bullshit.

If the historic emission is not there, then the current emission would also not be dangerous.

Are you denying that US emissions are falling since late 90s
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/US...-emissions
or that emissions of developing countries are growing rapidly
https://www.energylivenews.com/2021/02/0...d-in-2020/
https://fortune.com/2019/11/20/china-coa...te-change/
or that by 2100 when billions of people will supposedly die from climate change cumulative CO2 emissions would overwhelmengly come from low income countries?

Too fucking bad,  falling current emission does not erase past emissions.


If by some future date the total cummulative GHG emission from the developing world surpasses the cummulative emission from from the developed world, well, guess what, they are still well short of their quota and they are entitled to still cumulatively emit 8 more more than that,   Why?  Because the population of the developing world is 8 times bigger.    

So if all men are created equal, then every one in the developing world is entitled to the riches generated by what the developed world has availed its citizens with its own cummulative emission per capita. 

So until the developing world’s cummulative emission is 8 times bigger than the cumulative emission of the developed world, the developed world still would have no moral claim to equal contribution to offsetting carbon impact, on a per capita basis, from the developing world.

(January 19, 2023 at 4:59 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:40 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: Are you denying that US emissions are falling since late 90s
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/US...-emissions
or that emissions of developing countries are growing rapidly
https://www.energylivenews.com/2021/02/0...d-in-2020/
https://fortune.com/2019/11/20/china-coa...te-change/
or that by 2100 when billions of people will supposedly die from climate change cumulative CO2 emissions would overwhelmengly come from low income countries?

Too fucking bad,  falling current emission does not erase past emissions.

It significantly lowers US share of future cumulative emissions. In other words poor countries should provide most of the funding

(January 19, 2023 at 4:52 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:50 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: And how does that solve climate change?

Boru

Why should it solve climate change? As I said global warming will be net beneficial to the Global North

If it's a benefit, why do you keep calling carbon emissions a crime? If it's going to be beneficial to the North, shouldn't those countries be paying developing nations for making things better?

Boru

(January 19, 2023 at 5:06 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:59 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Too fucking bad,  falling current emission does not erase past emissions.

It significantly lowers US share of future cumulative emissions. In other words poor countries should provide most of the funding

Funding they might not be able to afford to pay?

(January 19, 2023 at 5:08 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 4:52 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: Why should it solve climate change? As I said global warming will be net beneficial to the Global North

If it's a benefit, why do you keep calling carbon emissions a crime?

Assuming that climate change will be as dangerous as climate alarmists claim, CO2 emissions by developing countries is a crime.

Quote:If it's going to be beneficial to the North, shouldn't those countries be paying developing nations for making things better?

No

(January 19, 2023 at 5:13 am)Rev. Rye Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 5:06 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: It significantly lowers US share of future cumulative emissions. In other words poor countries should provide most of the funding

Funding they might not be able to afford to pay?

Yearly GDP of developing countries is over $40 trillion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/8055...economies/
They can afford it.

(January 19, 2023 at 5:23 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 5:13 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: Funding they might not be able to afford to pay?

Yearly GDP of developing countries is over $40 trillion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/8055...economies/
They can afford it.

Do you even understand what GDP is?

Boru

(January 19, 2023 at 5:50 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 19, 2023 at 5:23 am)Dmitry1983 Wrote: Yearly GDP of developing countries is over $40 trillion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/8055...economies/
They can afford it.

Do you even understand what GDP is?

Boru

US GDP is 2 times lower