COP27 loss and damage fund

Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.

Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source

Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.

Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.

Report when things come up.

Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.

Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
User avatar
Aletheia
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
Location: England

Unread post

User avatar
Baconqueen13
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 6811
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:10 am
Location: In Sanity

Unread post

I think you're asking us to click a whole lot of links to do a whole lot of reading of other people's opinions on how funding for countries vulnerable to the effects of climate change should be divided but that takes more than just a couple articles and an insight into how the various countries are contributing to the climate disaster itself.

In short, it's above my paygrade.
Should there be help for countries that are most harshly affected by climate change including additional funding for those most severely impacted......absolutely.
What should that help entail or look like? Not my department.
Should we help even those countries that continue to making the climate change worse....yes.
How much should we help.......Not my department and the answer is far to complex and multi-faceted to begin to address in discussion on social media.

There will be "losers' in this deal no matter how you look at it and ultimately we're screwed either way because there is no way to get the entire world on board with the necessary steps to reduce climate change unless you're going to replace every country's government with ONE that will force the necessary changes.
User avatar
Baconqueen13
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 6811
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:10 am
Location: In Sanity

Unread post

User avatar
Aletheia
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
Location: England

Unread post

Baconqueen13 wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:53 pm I think you're asking us to click a whole lot of links to do a whole lot of reading
For which I apologise.

My preference would have been to make a post quoting the relevant passages, but the site admins have indicated they rather we not do that too much. :-(
User avatar
Aletheia
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
Location: England

Unread post

Baconqueen13 wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:53 pm Should there be help for countries that are most harshly affected by climate change including additional funding for those most severely impacted......absolutely.
What should that help entail or look like? Not my department.
Should we help even those countries that continue to making the climate change worse....yes.
How much should we help.......Not my department and the answer is far to complex and multi-faceted to begin to address in discussion on social media.

There will be "losers' in this deal no matter how you look at it
The stalling point in the talks seems to have been over the wording describing who should be contributing towards the fund.

The proposal the EU put forwards made it clear that countries with large GDPs would be expected to contribute, even if their GDP per capita wasn't particularly high (eg China). The reasoning, as far as I can tell, is that 'excusing' China would not be accepted by the American electoral base.
User avatar
Baconqueen13
Princess Royal
Princess Royal
Posts: 6811
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:10 am
Location: In Sanity

Unread post

Aletheia wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 3:41 pm
Baconqueen13 wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:53 pm Should there be help for countries that are most harshly affected by climate change including additional funding for those most severely impacted......absolutely.
What should that help entail or look like? Not my department.
Should we help even those countries that continue to making the climate change worse....yes.
How much should we help.......Not my department and the answer is far to complex and multi-faceted to begin to address in discussion on social media.

There will be "losers' in this deal no matter how you look at it
The stalling point in the talks seems to have been over the wording describing who should be contributing towards the fund.

The proposal the EU put forwards made it clear that countries with large GDPs would be expected to contribute, even if their GDP per capita wasn't particularly high (eg China). The reasoning, as far as I can tell, is that 'excusing' China would not be accepted by the American electoral base.
The stalling point is on liability. 30% of total global emissions comes from china, but then countries like the US use China for it's cheap labor and manufacturing....so then the US is complicit in China's global emissions total. Likewise The US is a major contributor in plastic wastes...which is shipped to other countries like China and india and end up in rivers that weep it out to sea contributing to marine plastic pollution. Now add in food waste, deforestation, power generating, overconsumption.........How does one determine which countries are "most at fault" for global pollution and how much they should pay....again, it is not easily resolved as it is far too multifaceted to "assign blame fairly".
Locked Previous topicNext topic