• poVoq@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 years ago

    The finger-pointing goes both ways though, with India and China just too willing to play the historical emissions card to postpone tackling their own current massive emissions.

    IMHO the west has a moral obligation to help poorer countries to adapt to the already inevitable, but that doesn’t mean other newly rich countries can slack on emission reductions.

    • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      lol, whos slacking what? china has a reasonable and realistic date to achieve carbon neutrality while the rest of the world isn’t even trying, this without keeping in mind that they are the factory of the world. ah, yeah, and none of the rich countries are helping shit, so you couldn’t expect third world countries to do miracles while they’re still getting fucked by anglos and europeans

      • poVoq@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 years ago

        2060 is sadly way to late. Yes other nations are not even seriously trying, but China has set their targets to an entirely self serving and way too late date.

        Basically they are saying we will not reduce at all (other then what happens through technological advances).

        2060 means that other nations will have to offset what China is polluting (obviously to the economic advantage of China) and if they don’t we are all fucked and China thinks they have an advantage that way too.

        Classic game theory argument where China is playing the lose-lose game trying to get out slightly less bad then their “competitors”.