4 ms·
So as long as your country is overflowing with poverty-stricken people, you're a role model for solidly low carbon emissions per capita? Got it..
by Danihan 9y ago
So as long as your country is overflowing with poverty-stricken people, you're a role model for solidly low carbon emissions per capita? Got it..
- dguaraglia 9y agoOh, moving the goalposts. The classical right-wing strategy.
- Danihan 9y agoHow is that moving the goalposts? Any poor, overpopulated country is going to have low per-capita carbon emissions, true or false? They also have a lower quality of life and poor GDP. Not exactly a positive goal to shoot for.
- dguaraglia 9y agoYou started by saying China emits double the amount of greenhouse gasses the US does. Someone pointed out that it's still lower on a per-capita basis, so you switched tack to "oh, well, yeah, but... WHY DO POOR COUNTRIES GET A PASS!" That, my friend, is moving the goalposts. So you want the US, richest nation in the world, to be held to the same standards as developing countries. Even though, in our economy, pushing for green energy actually generates more jobs than trying to bring back polluting industries. What, exactly, is there to gain from that?
- Danihan 9y agoI'm not trying to set (or move) any goalposts, I'm just pointing out that per capita emissions is a fairly useless metric to judge anything by, for reasons we seem to agree on. Ideally, I'd want the free market to manage the standards via private certification, rather than some monolithic, global, unenforceable treaty that is little more than virtue signaling via giving developing countries lots of free money for no (or negligible) return.