11–20 of 99 posts
i think we'll see this more and more as China shifts its manufacturing over to Africa (currently huge investments going on). It doesn't really solve the problem, you just get to point at someone else who's now holding the ball instead of you when it all goes up in flames.
I think its very important to engage with the fact that this is something China can do because of what we in the west deem unacceptably "authoritarian" governance. This effect isn't entirely due to people's starry-eyed conservationism: the government arrests people and closes factories that violate these ecological goals. By way of example, this happened a few weeks ago and is very difficult to find coverage of in en…
i think we'll see this more and more as China shifts its manufacturing over to Africa (currently huge investments going on). It doesn't really solve the problem, you just get to point at someone else who's now holding the ball instead of you when it all goes up in flames.
If China/India adopt and perfect green tech and export it to Africa, fucking awesome.
America is sadly too busy with infighting on stupid issues (Abortion, Gun restrictions , Voting rights... all important, stupid in that there still isn’t general consensus that these are all good ideas that should be adopted widely ASAP) while the rest of the world moves on.
This is a good counter-argument with some evidence that China and India are not the toxic hell hole that sometimes pops up in media. The thing that isn't mentioned in the article and is in the paper is that the majority >80% of the greening is due to cropland instead of the forests.
China: 8.49 India: 2.28 United States: 19.9 Japan: 10.55
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...
How does this "greening" help? Is it more due to agriculture or forests? If it's due to agriculture, what are the unintended consequences?
While this article is positive in its tone (which I appreciate) I can't help but feel that it's shallow. It's green so yayy! But what comes next? Increased greenery due to agriculture can probably never have the same positive effects as a forest, at least for the surrounding ecology and biome.
1) china might not actually be quite like its depicted in the west 2) what we call authoritarian is often just counter to our ideology that people should be able to deploy capital however they see fit with little consequence.
Anyway your point that it just takes correctly allocated capital to solve this problem is 100% salient.
(And before anyone jumps on #2, yes, the CPC does not allow some types of political dissent that we are allowed in public in the west and that should be criticized. But we need to criticize it for the right reasons, as opposed to blindly asserting that nothing horrible has ever happened due to what I would call free speech fundamentalism.)
I think its very important to engage with the fact that this is something China can do because of what we in the west deem unacceptably "authoritarian" governance. This effect isn't entirely due to people's starry-eyed conservationism: the government arrests people and closes factories that violate these ecological goals. By way of example, this happened a few weeks ago and is very difficult to find coverage of in en…
It won't take a dictator to plant trees, just government spending. In fact the EPA has done a lot without eliminating democracy in the US.
While I’m not arguing for the US to not be a democracy, it’s important to accept that democracies are not perfect, have many flaws and require constant vigilance to ensure the knobs of State power don’t end up in the hands of incompetent idiots (as they are in the current administration).
I think its very important to engage with the fact that this is something China can do because of what we in the west deem unacceptably "authoritarian" governance. This effect isn't entirely due to people's starry-eyed conservationism: the government arrests people and closes factories that violate these ecological goals. By way of example, this happened a few weeks ago and is very difficult to find coverage of in en…
Why isn't this a good thing? Shouldn't people who ignore ecological laws be punished? And anyway, how do you propose to fix climate change without massive, centralized planning, including punishment of those who subvert such a fix for personal gain?
Also, in your link, the plants are closed, not seized.
I think its very important to engage with the fact that this is something China can do because of what we in the west deem unacceptably "authoritarian" governance. This effect isn't entirely due to people's starry-eyed conservationism: the government arrests people and closes factories that violate these ecological goals. By way of example, this happened a few weeks ago and is very difficult to find coverage of in en…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won't take a dictator to plant trees, just government spending. In fact the EPA has done a lot without eliminating democracy in the US.
....And it’s currently run by a fossil fuel lobbyist. While I’m not arguing for the US to not be a democracy, it’s important to accept that democracies are not perfect, have many flaws and require constant vigilance to ensure the knobs of State power don’t end up in the hands of incompetent idiots (as they are in the current administration).