3 ms·

Regarding your argument about electricity, isn’t that what the US does? It burns coal and oil and has afaik virtually no limits or carbon taxes because “it woul

by sprafa 7y ago

Regarding your argument about electricity, isn’t that what the US does? It burns coal and oil and has afaik virtually no limits or carbon taxes because “it would hurt American industry”. Yeah sure if there were tariffs all around. But the US hegemony was until recently sort of predicated on little tariffs and global trade. So your advocating a sort of ... I don’t even know how to describe it - reverse carbon mercantilism where everybody attacks each other’s carbon emissions through tariffs? That sounds like a good recepy for dramatically worsening international relations.

AnthonyMouse 7y ago
> Regarding your argument about electricity, isn’t that what the US does? It burns coal and oil and has afaik virtually no limits or carbon taxes because “it would hurt American industry”. Because nobody is forcing them to do otherwise. So get somebody to. > That sounds like a good recepy for dramatically worsening international relations. Not really, because the point of the tariffs is to change behavior, not to actually collect the tariffs. You impose a high enough cost that reducing CO2 emissions is less expensive than paying the tariffs, so countries do that and then the tariffs don't get imposed because they're only imposed on countries that don't hit their targets.
- sprafa 7y ago
  There’s a strange sort of perversion to your idea that other countries should shoulder the responsibility to change your climate and carbon policy. Essentially the citizenship gets off free for not voting in more responsible politicians, and hey, “it’s the other countries fault for not forcing us to do it”. Hilarious.
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    Leaving an uninhabitable planet for future generations is not exactly my idea of getting off free.
    - sprafa 7y ago
      All I meant is that he is removing all responsibility of the population for their own government and effectively saying “other countries should force the US [to take action on climate change]” It’s like any internal change is impossible i his mind - the only way anything can happen is if other countries tariff each other, and if other countries force the US’s hand... why isn’t he campaigning for change instead of sitting around and saying other, “more responsible” countries, need to force the US to take action? That’s what I meant with “getting off free”. The population of the US, as far as I can tell, can choose some of their governments direction.
- sprafa 7y ago
  Looking back at this particular comment with less of a hothead, I can sort of see where you’re coming from. I still don’t understand how you would get this to work unless it was some sort of universal agreement. If it wasn’t such, what would stop it from descending into a carbon war, similar to the trade wars we have now with Trump, with cleaner countries aggressively adding tariffs to poorer, “dirtier” countries? It would just be a form of de-development for poor countries who can’t upgrade.
  - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
    > If it wasn’t such, what would stop it from descending into a carbon war, similar to the trade wars we have now with Trump, with cleaner countries aggressively adding tariffs to poorer, “dirtier” countries? The main reason would be that the poorer countries as a rule aren't actually dirtier. Countries by CO2 per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... It's basically a list sorted by approximately how rich they are, with rich oil states and big first world countries like the US, Canada and Australia at the top and impoverished African countries at the bottom. Moreover, actual poor countries like Haiti and Kenya are irrelevant in this game. They're emitting negligible amounts now and for new infrastructure renewables are already cheaper. This is all about the western countries and BRIC. None of them are "poor" to the extent that they can't be expected to pay the cost to clean up their own house. It's one thing to worry about countries like Ethiopia, but Russia is not that. Meanwhile the nature of the shift away from carbon makes it an economic stimulus for non-oil exporting countries like India and China because it allows them to stop paying to import oil and instead pay for renewables that can be from domestic producers.

by sprafa 7y ago

AnthonyMouse 7y ago

> Regarding your argument about electricity, isn’t that what the US does? It burns coal and oil and has afaik virtually no limits or carbon taxes because “it would hurt American industry”. Because nobody is forcing them to do otherwise. So get somebody to. > That sounds like a good recepy for dramatically worsening international relations. Not really, because the point of the tariffs is to change behavior, not to actually collect the tariffs. You impose a high enough cost that reducing CO2 emissions is less expensive than paying the tariffs, so countries do that and then the tariffs don't get imposed because they're only imposed on countries that don't hit their targets.

sprafa 7y ago
There’s a strange sort of perversion to your idea that other countries should shoulder the responsibility to change your climate and carbon policy. Essentially the citizenship gets off free for not voting in more responsible politicians, and hey, “it’s the other countries fault for not forcing us to do it”. Hilarious.
- rbanffy 7y ago
  Leaving an uninhabitable planet for future generations is not exactly my idea of getting off free.
  - sprafa 7y ago
    All I meant is that he is removing all responsibility of the population for their own government and effectively saying “other countries should force the US [to take action on climate change]” It’s like any internal change is impossible i his mind - the only way anything can happen is if other countries tariff each other, and if other countries force the US’s hand... why isn’t he campaigning for change instead of sitting around and saying other, “more responsible” countries, need to force the US to take action? That’s what I meant with “getting off free”. The population of the US, as far as I can tell, can choose some of their governments direction.
sprafa 7y ago
Looking back at this particular comment with less of a hothead, I can sort of see where you’re coming from. I still don’t understand how you would get this to work unless it was some sort of universal agreement. If it wasn’t such, what would stop it from descending into a carbon war, similar to the trade wars we have now with Trump, with cleaner countries aggressively adding tariffs to poorer, “dirtier” countries? It would just be a form of de-development for poor countries who can’t upgrade.
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago
  > If it wasn’t such, what would stop it from descending into a carbon war, similar to the trade wars we have now with Trump, with cleaner countries aggressively adding tariffs to poorer, “dirtier” countries? The main reason would be that the poorer countries as a rule aren't actually dirtier. Countries by CO2 per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... It's basically a list sorted by approximately how rich they are, with rich oil states and big first world countries like the US, Canada and Australia at the top and impoverished African countries at the bottom. Moreover, actual poor countries like Haiti and Kenya are irrelevant in this game. They're emitting negligible amounts now and for new infrastructure renewables are already cheaper. This is all about the western countries and BRIC. None of them are "poor" to the extent that they can't be expected to pay the cost to clean up their own house. It's one thing to worry about countries like Ethiopia, but Russia is not that. Meanwhile the nature of the shift away from carbon makes it an economic stimulus for non-oil exporting countries like India and China because it allows them to stop paying to import oil and instead pay for renewables that can be from domestic producers.