Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
GDB
Posts: 16520
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:23 pm

To expand on my previous post, there is an increasing anger here, not just with the young either;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ods-tories
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:37 pm

GDB wrote:
To expand on my previous post, there is an increasing anger here, not just with the young either;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ods-tories

"Reparation" is not "climate action".
The supposed goal of reparation is to relive people suffering from effect of climate change, not to alleviate climate change itself.
 
GDB
Posts: 16520
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:06 pm

c933103 wrote:
GDB wrote:
To expand on my previous post, there is an increasing anger here, not just with the young either;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ods-tories

"Reparation" is not "climate action".
The supposed goal of reparation is to relive people suffering from effect of climate change, not to alleviate climate change itself.


Yes, I know that, my views on reparation I have already stated, it is directly linked to where we are now, as I said, if we cannot even agree on this urgent action now and the forces that have led us here, you can whistle for reparations.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:41 pm

GDB wrote:
c933103 wrote:
GDB wrote:
To expand on my previous post, there is an increasing anger here, not just with the young either;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ods-tories

"Reparation" is not "climate action".
The supposed goal of reparation is to relive people suffering from effect of climate change, not to alleviate climate change itself.


Yes, I know that, my views on reparation I have already stated, it is directly linked to where we are now, as I said, if we cannot even agree on this urgent action now and the forces that have led us here, you can whistle for reparations.

My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.
 
A101
Topic Author
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 4:06 pm

scbriml wrote:
A101 wrote:

Per Capita is a flawed matrix to use

It's less flawed than blithely comparing two countries with populations of 1.4 billion and 25 million. That's just ludicrous.


Still a flawed matrix to follow of course the per capita comes down when you can divide it by a larger number

Considering that they also produce more than the OECD combined and their output has increased by more than 30% in the last 20 years
 
A101
Topic Author
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 5:02 pm

scbriml wrote:
A101 wrote:
Per Capita is a flawed matrix to use


It's less flawed than blithely comparing two countries with populations of 1.4 billion and 25 million. That's just ludicrous.





Also to add the context about the post




https://www.npr.org/2019/11/23/77598689 ... s-a-factor

https://www.climateandcapitalmedia.com/ ... -security/


For Sogavare climate is just a vessel to grab more money but the real motivation was to delay the national elections

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-09-08/

Hence the secret security pact with China....



bit like the Pacific Island countries putting the squeeze on Australia over climate and then running to China who emits more carbon every 16 days than Australia does in a year

e]
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 7:29 pm

A101 wrote:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/11/08/cop27-dont-owe-developing-countries-climate-reparations-owe/

I thought this was an interesting to see come out of cop27 and found the below quite amusing if not the seriousness. I bit like the Pacific Island countries putting the squeeze on Australia over climate and then running to China who emits more carbon every 16 days than Australia does in a year


Dear Pakistan,

It was with some surprise that we learnt that you and other countries, including Bangladesh, Kenya, Mauritius and even China, would be seeking “climate change reparations” from the United Kingdom at this week’s Cop27 summit. Apparently, you (and Ed Miliband) think that the terrible floods Pakistan suffered recently are entirely the fault of industrialised Western countries like our own because of historic carbon emissions.

While there may be some truth in that, other experts have suggested that the reason Pakistan experiences such terrible flooding is because you have cut down all your trees. Pakistan has the highest rate of deforestation in the world. When your nation was created in 1947, 33% of the total land mass was covered by forests; now that area is only 5%. Because of the lack of trees, the rain runs straight off the mountains into the silted up reservoirs which then overflow.

In addition, we would like to point out that Pakistan has always had major floods, many just as catastrophic as the recent one. The 1950 flood, for example, killed twice as many people as the 2022 flood within a much lower population. Not every natural disaster can be blamed on the United Kingdom, gratifying and lucrative though that accusation may be.

Pakistan is already one of the UK’s biggest recipients of aid. In 2019/20, you received around £302 million from our heavily indebted country, spanning areas including human development, climate and the environment. Most British people would consider that quite a generous gift to a nation which has its own nuclear weapons and a space programme. Pakistan also has more than a thousand coal mines. We do wonder whether you have any concerns about their impact or was it just British coal mines which caused a problem?

Plus, the present population of Pakistan is 225 million (up from 65 million in 1970) which will inevitably add to pressure on the environment. Sorry, there’s not a whole lot we can do about that.

The proposition, as we understand it, is that Pakistan should now receive “loss and damage” compensation from UK for the “cost” of historic emissions. How is that bill to be calculated exactly?

We remain proud of our Industrial Revolution which freed millions of ordinary people from back-breaking servitude, as well as causing a vast and sudden increase in life expectancy. For centuries, the average lifespan in the UK barely rose above 36 years. By 1901, life expectancy had jumped to 45 years (men) and 50 years (women), due to an increase in wealth, the production of cheaper goods, healthier diets and better education.

The UK will neither apologise nor make amends for the Industrial Revolution whose beneficial effects continue to be felt every day around our world.

Should you persist in your unfair demands for “climate reparations”, may we suggest you pay us royalties for the following: the internal combustion engine, Spinning Jenny, steam power, Tarmacadam, electrical telegraph, railways, automobiles, airplanes, radio, television, computers, pharmaceuticals and the world wide web.

We’ll throw in Parliamentary government and democracy for free as a gesture of goodwill. Bank transfers welcome.

Very best wishes and we remain cordially yours,

Britain


The goal is re-distribution of wealth, by whatever means. Alex Jones told me so!!
But, of course, the 1% will keep their wealth...
 
mxaxai
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 14, 2022 11:46 pm

c933103 wrote:
My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

It is both "too late" in the sense that there will be some climate change and yet "early enough" to still prevent catastrophic results. This includes limiting CO2 (and other greenhouse gas) emissions as well as mitigation of and preparation against probable natural disasters.
Mass migration resulting from the destruction of peoples' livelihoods through gradual climate change, overexploitation of natural resources or sudden disasters also needs to be tackled (preferably without telling them all to go drown in an ocean).

Of course there are also some who believe that any climate change is natural (or fake) and nothing needs to be done as long as their wealthy friends can afford to rebuild their vacation homes after a flood.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 12:16 am

mxaxai wrote:
c933103 wrote:
My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

It is both "too late" in the sense that there will be some climate change and yet "early enough" to still prevent catastrophic results.

I agree with you but some of the climate protests recently are calling for people to recognize the otherwise and urge governments to change their priority accordingly, according to my understanding.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11694
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 4:16 am

So is the carbon trading scheme between nations reparations by stealth?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 5:45 am

par13del wrote:
So is the carbon trading scheme between nations reparations by stealth?

That's not related to the topic I think
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11694
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 3:35 pm

c933103 wrote:
par13del wrote:
So is the carbon trading scheme between nations reparations by stealth?

That's not related to the topic I think

Its all related to climate change...the trading schemes allow those nations who are not meeting their climate change metrics to purchase carbon credits from nations who are and or have excess credits. The financial aspects of climate change started with the assigning, purchasing and selling of carbon credits. The man in the street is being sold on climate change and the need to do something, to those in the back it is all financial.
What was the last financial reparations that folks were on, slavery, now we have climate change.
 
A101
Topic Author
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 4:50 pm

par13del wrote:
c933103 wrote:
par13del wrote:
So is the carbon trading scheme between nations reparations by stealth?

That's not related to the topic I think

Its all related to climate change...the trading schemes allow those nations who are not meeting their climate change metrics to purchase carbon credits from nations who are and or have excess credits. The financial aspects of climate change started with the assigning, purchasing and selling of carbon credits. The man in the street is being sold on climate change and the need to do something, to those in the back it is all financial.
What was the last financial reparations that folks were on, slavery, now we have climate change.



Reparations for slavery was not based on taxes it was at the macro level in each nation on a combination of land rights. scholarships low cost loans and the recognition that it happened no fiscal additional taxes were raised by government that I have seen (not that it might have happened I just haven’t heard of it)

Carbon trading schemes are just another ponzi scheme dreamed up to increase taxes on the ordinary people
 
bluecrew
Posts: 682
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 5:52 pm

c933103 wrote:
GDB wrote:
c933103 wrote:
"Reparation" is not "climate action".
The supposed goal of reparation is to relive people suffering from effect of climate change, not to alleviate climate change itself.


Yes, I know that, my views on reparation I have already stated, it is directly linked to where we are now, as I said, if we cannot even agree on this urgent action now and the forces that have led us here, you can whistle for reparations.

My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 13344
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:40 pm

A101 wrote:
Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme


No, it is not, it is just paying for damages caused by polluting. If one flies, let's say Sydney to London, one passenger admits 6.1 t of carbon, to put that into perspective, an average household in the Netherlands admits around 20t a year. Pakistan is claiming over 30bn in damages from the floods, and that is just one natural disaster linked to climate change. So basically the poor farmer in Pakistan is effectively paying for releasing carbon with the destruction of his farm. Wouldn't it be only fair if the person causing the damages by flying, be responsible for paying? That's in very simplistic ways, the mechanism behind it.

The question is answered now. Let's put it to bed and now look at how we need to implement it.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 13344
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:44 pm

bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
GDB wrote:

Yes, I know that, my views on reparation I have already stated, it is directly linked to where we are now, as I said, if we cannot even agree on this urgent action now and the forces that have led us here, you can whistle for reparations.

My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.


Yup, the same tactics used by the cigarette lobby, they were and still are very effective to keep governments from taking action. The parallels between the two are quite scary but are well-known.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 13344
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:46 pm

A101 wrote:
Carbon trading schemes are just another ponzi scheme dreamed up to increase taxes on the ordinary people


No, it's not, it is using an economic principle to change the behavior of ordinary people. As you said yourself in the title, Climate change is serious, so we need to act accordingly, wouldn't you say?
 
A101
Topic Author
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:39 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme


No, it is not, it is just paying for damages caused by polluting. If one flies, let's say Sydney to London, one passenger admits 6.1 t of carbon, to put that into perspective, an average household in the Netherlands admits around 20t a year. Pakistan is claiming over 30bn in damages from the floods, and that is just one natural disaster linked to climate change. So basically the poor farmer in Pakistan is effectively paying for releasing carbon with the destruction of his farm. Wouldn't it be only fair if the person causing the damages by flying, be responsible for paying? That's in very simplistic ways, the mechanism behind it.

The question is answered now. Let's put it to bed and now look at how we need to implement it.


Please show how you come up with 6.1t per passenger please

Records only go back as far as 1961 for Pakistan. As for these being unusual due to climate change scientists agree that the rainfall in Pakistan is variable due to geographical conditions of moonseasonal weather conditions and the impact of La-Nina events. I think people are only looking and seeing what they only want to see confirmation bias
 
A101
Topic Author
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:42 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Carbon trading schemes are just another ponzi scheme dreamed up to increase taxes on the ordinary people


No, it's not, it is using an economic principle to change the behavior of ordinary people. As you said yourself in the title, Climate change is serious, so we need to act accordingly, wouldn't you say?




No it seems just a tax grab as most Government already have many different types of taxes onthe resource sector. They get their pound of flesh out it.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 8:23 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme


No, it is not, it is just paying for damages caused by polluting. If one flies, let's say Sydney to London, one passenger admits 6.1 t of carbon, to put that into perspective, an average household in the Netherlands admits around 20t a year. Pakistan is claiming over 30bn in damages from the floods, and that is just one natural disaster linked to climate change. So basically the poor farmer in Pakistan is effectively paying for releasing carbon with the destruction of his farm. Wouldn't it be only fair if the person causing the damages by flying, be responsible for paying? That's in very simplistic ways, the mechanism behind it.

The question is answered now. Let's put it to bed and now look at how we need to implement it.

A problem is paying to national government of affected countries do not mean people living in those countries can get equivalent benefit of it. Even in some more developed countries there are question of how much government spending are benefiting the people in their countries, not to mention government of countries that are less accountable to their own population.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 8:26 pm

bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
GDB wrote:

Yes, I know that, my views on reparation I have already stated, it is directly linked to where we are now, as I said, if we cannot even agree on this urgent action now and the forces that have led us here, you can whistle for reparations.

My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.

That make sense. However talking point of some of those people I was referring to aren't even saying technology will work, they are just saying things won't work and we are all doomed regardless.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11694
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 9:01 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme


No, it is not, it is just paying for damages caused by polluting. If one flies, let's say Sydney to London, one passenger admits 6.1 t of carbon, to put that into perspective, an average household in the Netherlands admits around 20t a year. Pakistan is claiming over 30bn in damages from the floods, and that is just one natural disaster linked to climate change. So basically the poor farmer in Pakistan is effectively paying for releasing carbon with the destruction of his farm. Wouldn't it be only fair if the person causing the damages by flying, be responsible for paying? That's in very simplistic ways, the mechanism behind it.

The question is answered now. Let's put it to bed and now look at how we need to implement it.

Being simplistic as you say, who invented the jet engine and why is the a/c being allowed to fly from Sydney to London, rather than a nation taxing citizens more to fly, why not just abolish flying, before flight folks travelled by boat, we still have history available to know how life will function, with refrigeration, food being transported by boat will not spoil.
If it really is not about money and making air travel a sin tax, why not abolish flying to save mankind? If medical facilities are swamped treating folks with lung issues from smoking, ban smoking, don't tax it, after all, if the tax is successful the industry will die right, so if about health....
 
mxaxai
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 10:00 pm

par13del wrote:
If it really is not about money and making air travel a sin tax, why not abolish flying to save mankind? If medical facilities are swamped treating folks with lung issues from smoking, ban smoking, don't tax it, after all, if the tax is successful the industry will die right, so if about health....

Controlled consumption of harmful and addicting substances is usually safer for everyone involved than a strict ban and resulting ban evasion. Separately, however, financial disincentives and accompanying education on the proven harmful effects can help people decide to stop or limit their harmful behaviour. Professional help can be provided to support those who struggle with addictions, for example to find alternative, less harmful activities.
 
bluecrew
Posts: 682
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Tue Nov 15, 2022 10:31 pm

c933103 wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
My understanding is that, in year 2022, there are now a group of people who consider it is already "too late" to avert climate change, and thus think the focus should be on helping poor countries dealing with the conssequences instead of still trying to avoid the "already certain to arrive" catastrophe.

The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.

That make sense. However talking point of some of those people I was referring to aren't even saying technology will work, they are just saying things won't work and we are all doomed regardless.

I mean, they're not wrong.

Wet bulb heat events are probably 10-15 years off, but heatwaves could render entire portions of the globe around the equator functionally uninhabitable. The Pakistan floods are a pretty good example of some of the escalating natural disasters that are already becoming more prevalent... how many record-breaking hurricanes have we had in the last ten years? One after another after another.

It's pretty grim to be an official in India, Bangladesh, etc., facing the prospect that you don't have the wealth or slightly more developed economy that might help shield the Gulf States from the worst, and tens or hundreds of millions of people that with a slight sea level rise or increase in temperatures will have their lives or livelihoods wiped out.

The Ministry for the Future, by Kim Stanley Robinson, explores a lot of the differences in outcomes based on geography, in a fairly well researched and entertaining fiction setting.

Millions if not billions will die from climate change, the effects are already here. Right now it feels like we're fiddling with the dial on just how many hundreds of millions.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 16, 2022 12:11 am

bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.

That make sense. However talking point of some of those people I was referring to aren't even saying technology will work, they are just saying things won't work and we are all doomed regardless.

I mean, they're not wrong.

Wet bulb heat events are probably 10-15 years off, but heatwaves could render entire portions of the globe around the equator functionally uninhabitable. The Pakistan floods are a pretty good example of some of the escalating natural disasters that are already becoming more prevalent... how many record-breaking hurricanes have we had in the last ten years? One after another after another.

It's pretty grim to be an official in India, Bangladesh, etc., facing the prospect that you don't have the wealth or slightly more developed economy that might help shield the Gulf States from the worst, and tens or hundreds of millions of people that with a slight sea level rise or increase in temperatures will have their lives or livelihoods wiped out.

The Ministry for the Future, by Kim Stanley Robinson, explores a lot of the differences in outcomes based on geography, in a fairly well researched and entertaining fiction setting.

Millions if not billions will die from climate change, the effects are already here. Right now it feels like we're fiddling with the dial on just how many hundreds of millions.

I think it is a continuous range. Like just this flood in Pakistan already killed thousands. I don't think it mean we are all doomed and nothing we can do can save the planet.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14613
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 16, 2022 4:20 am

c933103 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
A101 wrote:
Why would China change because of Australia if it would not. China has shown it will only reduce when its in its own interests to do so. It’s building how many new coal fired power stations compared to how many is Australia decommissioning without replacement. Solar and wind cannot compete for coal in base load power


What people who trumpet this line forget to add is China are also closing down hundreds of older less efficient dirtier power plants and replacing them with newer more efficient power plants.

https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2127 ... r-capacity

Your link explicitly
spelled out the reason. Overcapacity and air pollution.
And also note China's worsened relationship with Australia.


I know that’s why I posted it.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 2070
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:00 pm

Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.

Anyway, this isn't about colonization, since a country like the US that, well, is itself a colony, is expected to give money not receive it. My main issue isn't with the money giving, it's with the political situation in most of these countries, that means the money will not end up doing anything good, it might even make things worse.


You mean these fellas, who were paying, at a gunpoint, for generations, to France, for buying their own freedom from their slaveholders:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/read ... ments.html

I mean, tbh, Haiti wasn't the nicest place to be, for quite some time, and Papa Doc, while not a Pol Pot yet, was a very unpleasant character. But let's look at the root of their problem, OK?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 8:39 am

Phosphorus wrote:
Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.

Anyway, this isn't about colonization, since a country like the US that, well, is itself a colony, is expected to give money not receive it. My main issue isn't with the money giving, it's with the political situation in most of these countries, that means the money will not end up doing anything good, it might even make things worse.


You mean these fellas, who were paying, at a gunpoint, for generations, to France, for buying their own freedom from their slaveholders:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/read ... ments.html

I mean, tbh, Haiti wasn't the nicest place to be, for quite some time, and Papa Doc, while not a Pol Pot yet, was a very unpleasant character. But let's look at the root of their problem, OK?

You somehow think it is altruistic, for a country to demand another to pay another country money to recognize its independence?
And how is that related to climate change reparation?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 13344
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 10:14 am

A101 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
A101 wrote:
Per Capita is a flawed matrix to use


It's less flawed than blithely comparing two countries with populations of 1.4 billion and 25 million. That's just ludicrous.





Also to add the context about the post




https://www.npr.org/2019/11/23/77598689 ... s-a-factor

https://www.climateandcapitalmedia.com/ ... -security/


For Sogavare climate is just a vessel to grab more money but the real motivation was to delay the national elections

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-09-08/

Hence the secret security pact with China....



bit like the Pacific Island countries putting the squeeze on Australia over climate and then running to China who emits more carbon every 16 days than Australia does in a year

e]


Really? Claiming the moral high ground on climate change? China emits a lot of carbon to produce products for the western world, very much including Australia. And the emissions from flying all over the globe, aren't included in those numbers.

Anyhow, per capita: [url=https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/]Australia: 17,1ton and China 7,38tonp/url]. Or 2,3times as much. So don't know what the moral high ground would be based on.

The point being, people against this idea are looking for all kinds of excuses not to change their behavior and not taking any responsibility for their own emissions and the historic emissions from their country or countries in some cases.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 12:19 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
scbriml wrote:

It's less flawed than blithely comparing two countries with populations of 1.4 billion and 25 million. That's just ludicrous.





Also to add the context about the post




https://www.npr.org/2019/11/23/77598689 ... s-a-factor

https://www.climateandcapitalmedia.com/ ... -security/


For Sogavare climate is just a vessel to grab more money but the real motivation was to delay the national elections

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-09-08/

Hence the secret security pact with China....



bit like the Pacific Island countries putting the squeeze on Australia over climate and then running to China who emits more carbon every 16 days than Australia does in a year

e]


Really? Claiming the moral high ground on climate change? China emits a lot of carbon to produce products for the western world, very much including Australia. And the emissions from flying all over the globe, aren't included in those numbers.

Anyhow, per capita: [url=https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/]Australia: 17,1ton and China 7,38tonp/url]. Or 2,3times as much. So don't know what the moral high ground would be based on.

The point being, people against this idea are looking for all kinds of excuses not to change their behavior and not taking any responsibility for their own emissions and the historic emissions from their country or countries in some cases.

Problem is such kind of financial fund is not going to help the people they are intended to help if the money are simply give to relevant national governments. The people might even end up worse off due to there being more money popping up unpopular local governments. And then developed countries being made to produce such sort of payment might also create a sense among taxpayers that "why should we offer extra help to developing countries bow that our taxes already go to them", and refuse to adhere to proposals calling for help with more drastic cut in carbon emissions.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 4:38 pm

c933103 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:




Also to add the context about the post




https://www.npr.org/2019/11/23/77598689 ... s-a-factor

https://www.climateandcapitalmedia.com/ ... -security/


For Sogavare climate is just a vessel to grab more money but the real motivation was to delay the national elections

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-09-08/

Hence the secret security pact with China....





Really? Claiming the moral high ground on climate change? China emits a lot of carbon to produce products for the western world, very much including Australia. And the emissions from flying all over the globe, aren't included in those numbers.

Anyhow, per capita: [url=https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/]Australia: 17,1ton and China 7,38tonp/url]. Or 2,3times as much. So don't know what the moral high ground would be based on.

The point being, people against this idea are looking for all kinds of excuses not to change their behavior and not taking any responsibility for their own emissions and the historic emissions from their country or countries in some cases.

Problem is such kind of financial fund is not going to help the people they are intended to help if the money are simply give to relevant national governments. The people might even end up worse off due to there being more money popping up unpopular local governments. And then developed countries being made to produce such sort of payment might also create a sense among taxpayers that "why should we offer extra help to developing countries bow that our taxes already go to them", and refuse to adhere to proposals calling for help with more drastic cut in carbon emissions.


They’ve already agreed to set up the fund. There are many ways to monitor how it’s used, and cut it off if it’s misused.

Not really sure what you’re trying to argue anyhow; that nobody should help people explicitly suffering from climate catastrophes because their governments would rather steal the money than help them?

The alternative being what? Sit aside and let them suffer?

Maybe stop looking down on these folk because of prejudices and stereotypes of developing countries in general (some of them know how to pull themselves together during crises), and consider acknowledging that real human beings are actually suffering. And maybe consider that some of these apparently uniformly corrupt government officials (because, after all, every official in a developing country must be morally dubious) might forgo an S class to help them.
 
bennett123
Posts: 11646
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 4:48 pm

c933103 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:




Also to add the context about the post




https://www.npr.org/2019/11/23/77598689 ... s-a-factor

https://www.climateandcapitalmedia.com/ ... -security/


For Sogavare climate is just a vessel to grab more money but the real motivation was to delay the national elections

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-09-08/

Hence the secret security pact with China....





Really? Claiming the moral high ground on climate change? China emits a lot of carbon to produce products for the western world, very much including Australia. And the emissions from flying all over the globe, aren't included in those numbers.

Anyhow, per capita: [url=https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/]Australia: 17,1ton and China 7,38tonp/url]. Or 2,3times as much. So don't know what the moral high ground would be based on.

The point being, people against this idea are looking for all kinds of excuses not to change their behavior and not taking any responsibility for their own emissions and the historic emissions from their country or countries in some cases.

Problem is such kind of financial fund is not going to help the people they are intended to help if the money are simply give to relevant national governments. The people might even end up worse off due to there being more money popping up unpopular local governments. And then developed countries being made to produce such sort of payment might also create a sense among taxpayers that "why should we offer extra help to developing countries bow that our taxes already go to them", and refuse to adhere to proposals calling for help with more drastic cut in carbon emissions.


What is your solution?.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 16163
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 5:51 pm

bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
The adaptation folks have been around for years and years. At least in the US they're almost exclusively funded by oil money and sketchy PACs.
It's always been a misdirection attempt to prevent countries from taking any real action, publish awful white papers that play down the risk and act like technology will just curb the need to respond - it's a lobbying front for oil.

That make sense. However talking point of some of those people I was referring to aren't even saying technology will work, they are just saying things won't work and we are all doomed regardless.

I mean, they're not wrong.

Wet bulb heat events are probably 10-15 years off, but heatwaves could render entire portions of the globe around the equator functionally uninhabitable. The Pakistan floods are a pretty good example of some of the escalating natural disasters that are already becoming more prevalent... how many record-breaking hurricanes have we had in the last ten years? One after another after another.

It's pretty grim to be an official in India, Bangladesh, etc., facing the prospect that you don't have the wealth or slightly more developed economy that might help shield the Gulf States from the worst, and tens or hundreds of millions of people that with a slight sea level rise or increase in temperatures will have their lives or livelihoods wiped out.

The Ministry for the Future, by Kim Stanley Robinson, explores a lot of the differences in outcomes based on geography, in a fairly well researched and entertaining fiction setting.

Millions if not billions will die from climate change, the effects are already here. Right now it feels like we're fiddling with the dial on just how many hundreds of millions.


It doesn't seem like governments in Pakistan are even trying, though. For example deforestation is still going on despite having already destroyed most forests, and that increases the risk and severity of floods. Incentives to have less kids should be on the cards, too.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5744
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 5:56 pm

Extreme climate events seem to be happening frequently enough without any of the collective actions to prevent the most likely worse case warming - near 2 degrees centigrade. There may be no solutions politically possible at this time. That has been a worry of mine since the 1990s. Humans have not evolved sufficiently to really plan for things much beyond the next year. And many of the richest beyond the next financial quarter. Bad news.
 
bluecrew
Posts: 682
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 6:31 pm

Aesma wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
c933103 wrote:
That make sense. However talking point of some of those people I was referring to aren't even saying technology will work, they are just saying things won't work and we are all doomed regardless.

I mean, they're not wrong.

Wet bulb heat events are probably 10-15 years off, but heatwaves could render entire portions of the globe around the equator functionally uninhabitable. The Pakistan floods are a pretty good example of some of the escalating natural disasters that are already becoming more prevalent... how many record-breaking hurricanes have we had in the last ten years? One after another after another.

It's pretty grim to be an official in India, Bangladesh, etc., facing the prospect that you don't have the wealth or slightly more developed economy that might help shield the Gulf States from the worst, and tens or hundreds of millions of people that with a slight sea level rise or increase in temperatures will have their lives or livelihoods wiped out.

The Ministry for the Future, by Kim Stanley Robinson, explores a lot of the differences in outcomes based on geography, in a fairly well researched and entertaining fiction setting.

Millions if not billions will die from climate change, the effects are already here. Right now it feels like we're fiddling with the dial on just how many hundreds of millions.


It doesn't seem like governments in Pakistan are even trying, though. For example deforestation is still going on despite having already destroyed most forests, and that increases the risk and severity of floods. Incentives to have less kids should be on the cards, too.

I'm not saying what they're doing today is defensible. I'm saying not doing something and bringing them along with us is going to ultimately be catastrophic.

I'll be honest, I'm not being Pollyanna-ish about this, I don't think we can do it. I don't see countries uniting enough on this, I think the selfish outcomes are just decent enough looking right now that China/India/Pakistan/Brazil/etc. are not incentivized to decarbonize at all. They're just watching the GDP go up and up.

And if we wake up to 50 million dead in a heatwave in Bangladesh, or 2 million dead and displaced by a flood in India, I still don't think we're going to take the increasingly bold actions to narrowly avoid the worst IPCC forecast. We need to be investing in carbon capture and processing, wind, solar, nuclear, battery technology for renewables, not the current approach, which is making excuses for energy companies to frack because natural gas is less awful than oil, not considering nuclear power while gas-fired remains the largest chunk, and offering renewables offsets on home utility bills so we all feel better. Why are we letting Woodside build the Burrup Hub? An oil mining project that's been studied by numerous environmental watchdogs, and categorized as "Australia's Most Polluting Project Ever:"

The UN's lack of actual enforcement authority, perverse incentives for energy companies as much as developing countries, and western handwringing. That's the best we have, 40 years or so into the discussion (I'd say the 1985 hole in the ozone layer started to shift the conversation from the Silent Spring era to the "oh no we can actually like destroy the atmosphere" conversation).

Like I said, not optimistic.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 2070
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Sun Nov 20, 2022 8:16 pm

c933103 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.

Anyway, this isn't about colonization, since a country like the US that, well, is itself a colony, is expected to give money not receive it. My main issue isn't with the money giving, it's with the political situation in most of these countries, that means the money will not end up doing anything good, it might even make things worse.


You mean these fellas, who were paying, at a gunpoint, for generations, to France, for buying their own freedom from their slaveholders:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/read ... ments.html

I mean, tbh, Haiti wasn't the nicest place to be, for quite some time, and Papa Doc, while not a Pol Pot yet, was a very unpleasant character. But let's look at the root of their problem, OK?

You somehow think it is altruistic, for a country to demand another to pay another country money to recognize its independence?
And how is that related to climate change reparation?


Well, I guess you are reading my argument wrong.
A typical Gallic narrative, as perfectly exemplified above by @Aesma, is "
Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.
...

Read it again.
You occupy a part of an island called Hispaniola. You create a slaveholding society, with workforce working under leash, for free.
Slaves rebel and free themselves.

You are not happy, and you force them to pay a fortune, for more than a century, to buy their freedom from you. 'Cause you suffered an economic loss, when slaves stopped being your property, you know.

So we have a rare case, when we CAN know, for sure, whether it would have been better or worse. Because if the French just buggered off, once slaves freed themselves, Haiti would be better off -- than if Haiti had to pay "reparations" to France, for more than a century -- essentially buying freedom from slavery in installments for five generations. Don't you agree?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 16163
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 1:14 am

I don't know. I also find it interesting these stories were published in US newspapers accusing France, when it's the US that enforced a lot of these payments (after 1888), including by invading the country, stealing their gold, etc.

I'm all for paying 21 billions to settle that debt if it's deemed genuine, I don't think it can be done as long as HaIti isn't governed properly, though.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:51 am

bennett123 wrote:
What is your solution?.

My personal opinion is to put more money into R&D on technologies that can withstand impact of extreme climate and to send the result to developing countries for installation. It would be much better than sending the money directly to those countries to just let them use them up one-off.
But even without such sort of solutions, not doing anything would still be more helpful than providing such funding to enable developing countries government wrecking harvoc and be suffer from something similar to resource curse due to such funding.
ElPistolero wrote:
They’ve already agreed to set up the fund. There are many ways to monitor how it’s used, and cut it off if it’s misused.

Not really sure what you’re trying to argue anyhow; that nobody should help people explicitly suffering from climate catastrophes because their governments would rather steal the money than help them?

The alternative being what? Sit aside and let them suffer?

Maybe stop looking down on these folk because of prejudices and stereotypes of developing countries in general (some of them know how to pull themselves together during crises), and consider acknowledging that real human beings are actually suffering. And maybe consider that some of these apparently uniformly corrupt government officials (because, after all, every official in a developing country must be morally dubious) might forgo an S class to help them.

It is not the problem of these folks. They are all good. But governments aren't. To many of those countries that's main reason they failed to become a developed countries, mopst notably in Southeast Asia.
In fact not even developed countries can make good use of a large amount of funds if they are suddenly provided with such. Like see the content and percentage distribution of US's built back better infrastructure bill. Passing such amount of money to governments aren't a good idea.

As for the agreement, let see how they would propose spending and allocating the fund.

Aesma wrote:
It doesn't seem like governments in Pakistan are even trying, though. For example deforestation is still going on despite having already destroyed most forests, and that increases the risk and severity of floods. Incentives to have less kids should be on the cards, too.


bluecrew wrote:
I'm not saying what they're doing today is defensible. I'm saying not doing something and bringing them along with us is going to ultimately be catastrophic.

I'll be honest, I'm not being Pollyanna-ish about this, I don't think we can do it. I don't see countries uniting enough on this, I think the selfish outcomes are just decent enough looking right now that China/India/Pakistan/Brazil/etc. are not incentivized to decarbonize at all. They're just watching the GDP go up and up.

And if we wake up to 50 million dead in a heatwave in Bangladesh, or 2 million dead and displaced by a flood in India, I still don't think we're going to take the increasingly bold actions to narrowly avoid the worst IPCC forecast. We need to be investing in carbon capture and processing, wind, solar, nuclear, battery technology for renewables, not the current approach, which is making excuses for energy companies to frack because natural gas is less awful than oil, not considering nuclear power while gas-fired remains the largest chunk, and offering renewables offsets on home utility bills so we all feel better. Why are we letting Woodside build the Burrup Hub? An oil mining project that's been studied by numerous environmental watchdogs, and categorized as "Australia's Most Polluting Project Ever:"

The UN's lack of actual enforcement authority, perverse incentives for energy companies as much as developing countries, and western handwringing. That's the best we have, 40 years or so into the discussion (I'd say the 1985 hole in the ozone layer started to shift the conversation from the Silent Spring era to the "oh no we can actually like destroy the atmosphere" conversation).

Like I said, not optimistic.


Well to be fair, this reparation is totally not about fighting climate change itself, but only its effect.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:52 am

Phosphorus wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:

You mean these fellas, who were paying, at a gunpoint, for generations, to France, for buying their own freedom from their slaveholders:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/read ... ments.html

I mean, tbh, Haiti wasn't the nicest place to be, for quite some time, and Papa Doc, while not a Pol Pot yet, was a very unpleasant character. But let's look at the root of their problem, OK?

You somehow think it is altruistic, for a country to demand another to pay another country money to recognize its independence?
And how is that related to climate change reparation?


Well, I guess you are reading my argument wrong.
A typical Gallic narrative, as perfectly exemplified above by @Aesma, is "
Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.
...

Read it again.
You occupy a part of an island called Hispaniola. You create a slaveholding society, with workforce working under leash, for free.
Slaves rebel and free themselves.

You are not happy, and you force them to pay a fortune, for more than a century, to buy their freedom from you. 'Cause you suffered an economic loss, when slaves stopped being your property, you know.

So we have a rare case, when we CAN know, for sure, whether it would have been better or worse. Because if the French just buggered off, once slaves freed themselves, Haiti would be better off -- than if Haiti had to pay "reparations" to France, for more than a century -- essentially buying freedom from slavery in installments for five generations. Don't you agree?

What you suggest as compensation to this would be reparation for slavery instead of reparation for climate change
 
Derico
Posts: 4575
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 1:52 pm

bluecrew wrote:
Aesma wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
I mean, they're not wrong.

Wet bulb heat events are probably 10-15 years off, but heatwaves could render entire portions of the globe around the equator functionally uninhabitable. The Pakistan floods are a pretty good example of some of the escalating natural disasters that are already becoming more prevalent... how many record-breaking hurricanes have we had in the last ten years? One after another after another.

It's pretty grim to be an official in India, Bangladesh, etc., facing the prospect that you don't have the wealth or slightly more developed economy that might help shield the Gulf States from the worst, and tens or hundreds of millions of people that with a slight sea level rise or increase in temperatures will have their lives or livelihoods wiped out.

The Ministry for the Future, by Kim Stanley Robinson, explores a lot of the differences in outcomes based on geography, in a fairly well researched and entertaining fiction setting.

Millions if not billions will die from climate change, the effects are already here. Right now it feels like we're fiddling with the dial on just how many hundreds of millions.


It doesn't seem like governments in Pakistan are even trying, though. For example deforestation is still going on despite having already destroyed most forests, and that increases the risk and severity of floods. Incentives to have less kids should be on the cards, too.

I'm not saying what they're doing today is defensible. I'm saying not doing something and bringing them along with us is going to ultimately be catastrophic.

I'll be honest, I'm not being Pollyanna-ish about this, I don't think we can do it. I don't see countries uniting enough on this, I think the selfish outcomes are just decent enough looking right now that China/India/Pakistan/Brazil/etc. are not incentivized to decarbonize at all. They're just watching the GDP go up and up.

And if we wake up to 50 million dead in a heatwave in Bangladesh, or 2 million dead and displaced by a flood in India, I still don't think we're going to take the increasingly bold actions to narrowly avoid the worst IPCC forecast. We need to be investing in carbon capture and processing, wind, solar, nuclear, battery technology for renewables, not the current approach, which is making excuses for energy companies to frack because natural gas is less awful than oil, not considering nuclear power while gas-fired remains the largest chunk, and offering renewables offsets on home utility bills so we all feel better. Why are we letting Woodside build the Burrup Hub? An oil mining project that's been studied by numerous environmental watchdogs, and categorized as "Australia's Most Polluting Project Ever:"

The UN's lack of actual enforcement authority, perverse incentives for energy companies as much as developing countries, and western handwringing. That's the best we have, 40 years or so into the discussion (I'd say the 1985 hole in the ozone layer started to shift the conversation from the Silent Spring era to the "oh no we can actually like destroy the atmosphere" conversation).

Like I said, not optimistic.


This generation of Politicians could not get together during the height of COVID to reach an international strategy. So if they could not do it with an imminent and visible threat killing people around them, and possibly killing them too, no chance they will do anything about nebulous phenomena that cannot be pinned down in a simple, immediate fashion.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 2070
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 3:16 pm

c933103 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
c933103 wrote:
You somehow think it is altruistic, for a country to demand another to pay another country money to recognize its independence?
And how is that related to climate change reparation?


Well, I guess you are reading my argument wrong.
A typical Gallic narrative, as perfectly exemplified above by @Aesma, is "
Aesma wrote:
The reasons for colonization were not altruistic, clearly. Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know. France had a colony in the Caribbean named Saint-Domingue, that it lost more than two centuries ago. It has been an independent country since then, the result isn't exactly stellar.
...

Read it again.
You occupy a part of an island called Hispaniola. You create a slaveholding society, with workforce working under leash, for free.
Slaves rebel and free themselves.

You are not happy, and you force them to pay a fortune, for more than a century, to buy their freedom from you. 'Cause you suffered an economic loss, when slaves stopped being your property, you know.

So we have a rare case, when we CAN know, for sure, whether it would have been better or worse. Because if the French just buggered off, once slaves freed themselves, Haiti would be better off -- than if Haiti had to pay "reparations" to France, for more than a century -- essentially buying freedom from slavery in installments for five generations. Don't you agree?

What you suggest as compensation to this would be reparation for slavery instead of reparation for climate change

I'm actually suggesting nor implying neither of those things.

I'm directly challenging the idea that "Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know.". Because we DO know.
Whether this knowledge would lead to reparations -- is another question entirely.
And actually these reparations are neither for climate change nor for slavery -- they would be for gun-point robbery by a colonialist power, whose earlier cunning little plan to force slaves to work for free didn't work out.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 13344
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:13 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
I'm directly challenging the idea that "Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know.". Because we DO know.
Whether this knowledge would lead to reparations -- is another question entirely.
And actually these reparations are neither for climate change nor for slavery -- they would be for gun-point robbery by a colonialist power, whose earlier cunning little plan to force slaves to work for free didn't work out.


This is a long way away from climate change and compensation for damages from that.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 2070
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 5:23 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
I'm directly challenging the idea that "Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know.". Because we DO know.
Whether this knowledge would lead to reparations -- is another question entirely.
And actually these reparations are neither for climate change nor for slavery -- they would be for gun-point robbery by a colonialist power, whose earlier cunning little plan to force slaves to work for free didn't work out.


This is a long way away from climate change and compensation for damages from that.


I agree, but the narrative pushed is "we have no idea which way would it be worse -- with us or without us. Look at Haiti -- without us it's hell" -- whereas in reality, we do know, Haiti is hell, in no small part because of them. I take issue with that specific statement, as it's used as a platform for "why is this any of our fault".
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 7:31 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
I'm directly challenging the idea that "Did it result in a worse economic situation for the places involved that if there was no colonization, I don't know, I don't see how anyone can know.". Because we DO know.
Whether this knowledge would lead to reparations -- is another question entirely.
And actually these reparations are neither for climate change nor for slavery -- they would be for gun-point robbery by a colonialist power, whose earlier cunning little plan to force slaves to work for free didn't work out.


This is a long way away from climate change and compensation for damages from that.


I agree, but the narrative pushed is "we have no idea which way would it be worse -- with us or without us. Look at Haiti -- without us it's hell" -- whereas in reality, we do know, Haiti is hell, in no small part because of them. I take issue with that specific statement, as it's used as a platform for "why is this any of our fault".

I don't think this sort of argument is meaningful to construct actually. Like one can argue the Pacific island countries are still better off with access to the summary of Global human civilization and knowledge and technology nowadays than being isolated from each others and from outside world by the sheer side of ocean having nothing, but does the summary of human civlization andknowledge and technology mean the Pacific islanders can't get better treatment in the process of interacting with outside world, no matter it is in term of being treated more fairly by foreign powers or if it is being treated with more care when it come to issue of climate change affecting atolls that they live on.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 2070
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Mon Nov 21, 2022 10:26 pm

c933103 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

This is a long way away from climate change and compensation for damages from that.


I agree, but the narrative pushed is "we have no idea which way would it be worse -- with us or without us. Look at Haiti -- without us it's hell" -- whereas in reality, we do know, Haiti is hell, in no small part because of them. I take issue with that specific statement, as it's used as a platform for "why is this any of our fault".

I don't think this sort of argument is meaningful to construct actually. Like one can argue the Pacific island countries are still better off with access to the summary of Global human civilization and knowledge and technology nowadays than being isolated from each others and from outside world by the sheer side of ocean having nothing, but does the summary of human civlization andknowledge and technology mean the Pacific islanders can't get better treatment in the process of interacting with outside world, no matter it is in term of being treated more fairly by foreign powers or if it is being treated with more care when it come to issue of climate change affecting atolls that they live on.


It really depends on the scale that you are debating, and exactly what can be meant by "the Pacific island countries are still better off".
Did technology and progress deliver good news to humankind? Probably yes. Did those specific countries benefit by now? Probably yes, on balance.
(By a country, we typically mean an entity, combining territory, people populating it, and the government thereof. A triad, so to say.)

Having said that, we also remember that he seas apparently are rising.

Ad extremis, the moment one of those island countries stops being inhabitable, and the superimposing triad of territory, people populating it and government thereof -- is no longer in existence. I.e. there is an uninhabitable territory, and people and government that had to take refuge elsewhere. It thus effectively ceases to exist as a functional country.

Could we, with a strait face, argue at that point, about that particular country, "this Pacific island country is still better off"? At the point it no longer exists?
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8685
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 23, 2022 3:39 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Really? Claiming the moral high ground on climate change? China emits a lot of carbon to produce products for the western world, very much including Australia. And the emissions from flying all over the globe, aren't included in those numbers.

Anyhow, per capita: [url=https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/]Australia: 17,1ton and China 7,38tonp/url]. Or 2,3times as much. So don't know what the moral high ground would be based on.

The point being, people against this idea are looking for all kinds of excuses not to change their behavior and not taking any responsibility for their own emissions and the historic emissions from their country or countries in some cases.

Problem is such kind of financial fund is not going to help the people they are intended to help if the money are simply give to relevant national governments. The people might even end up worse off due to there being more money popping up unpopular local governments. And then developed countries being made to produce such sort of payment might also create a sense among taxpayers that "why should we offer extra help to developing countries bow that our taxes already go to them", and refuse to adhere to proposals calling for help with more drastic cut in carbon emissions.


They’ve already agreed to set up the fund. There are many ways to monitor how it’s used, and cut it off if it’s misused.

Not really sure what you’re trying to argue anyhow; that nobody should help people explicitly suffering from climate catastrophes because their governments would rather steal the money than help them?

The alternative being what? Sit aside and let them suffer?

Maybe stop looking down on these folk because of prejudices and stereotypes of developing countries in general (some of them know how to pull themselves together during crises), and consider acknowledging that real human beings are actually suffering. And maybe consider that some of these apparently uniformly corrupt government officials (because, after all, every official in a developing country must be morally dubious) might forgo an S class to help them.


If the money goes to governments, it will absolutely not help people hurt by anything. It’s far more likely to worsen corruption in developing countries, which is a major reason holding back their own political and economic development.

Corruption is not a stereotype. It’s very real, widespread and creates massive social and economic problems.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8685
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 23, 2022 3:48 pm

And do NOT gloss over the complexities of controlling how this money is spent. The local corrupt politicians will decry a lack of control over the funds if anti-corruption mechanism are attempted. Cries of loss of sovereignty, “colonialism”, etc, will abound.

Controlling the allocation of money is not an easy task at all. If it were, corruption wouldn’t be such a widespread problem in this planet.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 23, 2022 6:00 pm

PPVRA wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Problem is such kind of financial fund is not going to help the people they are intended to help if the money are simply give to relevant national governments. The people might even end up worse off due to there being more money popping up unpopular local governments. And then developed countries being made to produce such sort of payment might also create a sense among taxpayers that "why should we offer extra help to developing countries bow that our taxes already go to them", and refuse to adhere to proposals calling for help with more drastic cut in carbon emissions.


They’ve already agreed to set up the fund. There are many ways to monitor how it’s used, and cut it off if it’s misused.

Not really sure what you’re trying to argue anyhow; that nobody should help people explicitly suffering from climate catastrophes because their governments would rather steal the money than help them?

The alternative being what? Sit aside and let them suffer?

Maybe stop looking down on these folk because of prejudices and stereotypes of developing countries in general (some of them know how to pull themselves together during crises), and consider acknowledging that real human beings are actually suffering. And maybe consider that some of these apparently uniformly corrupt government officials (because, after all, every official in a developing country must be morally dubious) might forgo an S class to help them.


If the money goes to governments, it will absolutely not help people hurt by anything. It’s far more likely to worsen corruption in developing countries, which is a major reason holding back their own political and economic development.

Corruption is not a stereotype. It’s very real, widespread and creates massive social and economic problems.


Nah. It’s a lazy stereotype.

This notion that every dollar that goes in will be gobbled by some corrupt lout doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. None of them should have any functioning infrastructure by that logic, what with the corrupt officials siphoning off every available dollar.

It’s not that corruption isn’t a problem; it is. But the notion that none of that aid will make it to those who need it the most, is for the birds.

At most, we can debate the efficiency and wastage of aid (to factors such as corruption), but those aren’t un-addressable in and off themselves.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6975
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 23, 2022 6:32 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
PPVRA wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:

They’ve already agreed to set up the fund. There are many ways to monitor how it’s used, and cut it off if it’s misused.

Not really sure what you’re trying to argue anyhow; that nobody should help people explicitly suffering from climate catastrophes because their governments would rather steal the money than help them?

The alternative being what? Sit aside and let them suffer?

Maybe stop looking down on these folk because of prejudices and stereotypes of developing countries in general (some of them know how to pull themselves together during crises), and consider acknowledging that real human beings are actually suffering. And maybe consider that some of these apparently uniformly corrupt government officials (because, after all, every official in a developing country must be morally dubious) might forgo an S class to help them.


If the money goes to governments, it will absolutely not help people hurt by anything. It’s far more likely to worsen corruption in developing countries, which is a major reason holding back their own political and economic development.

Corruption is not a stereotype. It’s very real, widespread and creates massive social and economic problems.


Nah. It’s a lazy stereotype.

This notion that every dollar that goes in will be gobbled by some corrupt lout doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. None of them should have any functioning infrastructure by that logic, what with the corrupt officials siphoning off every available dollar.

It’s not that corruption isn’t a problem; it is. But the notion that none of that aid will make it to those who need it the most, is for the birds.

At most, we can debate the efficiency and wastage of aid (to factors such as corruption), but those aren’t un-addressable in and off themselves.

Even if efficiency of a project isn't dead 0%, funneling money through a corrupted system can still do more harm than good compares to the lack of such money. Like for example sending Myanmar government 1 billion USD might ultimately help them increase the living standard of people in the country but at what cost to the people living there as well as people around them?
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 3083
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Climate change is serious, but reparations to poorer nations is just a money grabbing scheme

Wed Nov 23, 2022 8:02 pm

c933103 wrote:
Even if efficiency of a project isn't dead 0%, funneling money through a corrupted system can still do more harm than good compares to the lack of such money. Like for example sending Myanmar government 1 billion USD might ultimately help them increase the living standard of people in the country but at what cost to the people living there as well as people around them?


Yeah, I’m sure people suffering the in the aftermath of severe climate events will understand that it is necessary for them to suffer because of their corrupt overlords.

This whole corruption thing is a distraction. If we believe that people are suffering in the aftermath of severe climate events, either we think it’s incumbent on us to help. Or we don’t - that fundamentally it’s their problem, not ours.

Let’s just be honest about it instead of floating smokescreens.

I don’t think the person suffering in the here and now will buy into these convoluted justifications for doing nothing. Assuming they actually matter.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1337Delta764, 910A, johns624, Redd and 30 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos