Should lesser developed countries reduce carbon emissions as part of a global initiative?
I've been reading a handy bit of this thinkprogress.org/climate/2014…, and it got me thinking about which countries should be taking the initiative to reduce CO2 emissions. Now, the only problem with this story in how it's related to my question is that Australia is a well-developed country. Take a country like India as a better example. If carbon emissions are a dire global threat, what would the alternative be to a country which is presently developing? Central question:
Should developed countries should not sign on a new agreement restricting the emission of greenhouse gases unless developing countries agree to limit their emissions? Discuss.
Should developed countries should not sign on a new agreement restricting the emission of greenhouse gases unless developing countries agree to limit their emissions? Discuss.
Comments27
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
india?
Try China.
Or Smoglandia.
Try China.
Or Smoglandia.
ThinkProgress 
My main problem is that this comes from Thinkprogress.org.
With that aside let me make an observation. I always hear people talking about how 'we' need to reduce our carbon emissions, but do I ever hear about the concern over China and India? Rarely if ever.
With that aside let me make an observation. I always hear people talking about how 'we' need to reduce our carbon emissions, but do I ever hear about the concern over China and India? Rarely if ever.
ThinkProgress......ha!
No one takes them seriously.
No one takes them seriously.
The only problem with this story? It's from ThinkProgress, I don't have to even read it to tell you that's not the only problem with the story.
Australia's carbon output per capita 2009-2013: 16.9 metric tons
India's carbon output per capita in the same period: 1.7 metric tons
Australians put out ten times as much carbon emissions per person than Indians.
There are a lot more Indians than their are Australians, but those Indians are also living in far worse poverty. Many millions don't even have access to electricity or have cars, and thus have a far lower standard of living and lower carbon emission. As India tries to increase its standard of living, their output is increasing. Do Australians have some intrinsic right to a higher standard of living than Indians? That's what the argument of "developing countries need to lower their carbon emissions before developed countries give up an inch" amounts to; developed countries refusing to act while forcing developing countries into stagnant or negative standard of living changes.
Australia needs to do a lot more to bring down its carbon emissions. By doing so, they will develop technologies that will allow developing countries to increase their own standards of living without dramatically increasing their carbon output.
India's carbon output per capita in the same period: 1.7 metric tons
Australians put out ten times as much carbon emissions per person than Indians.
There are a lot more Indians than their are Australians, but those Indians are also living in far worse poverty. Many millions don't even have access to electricity or have cars, and thus have a far lower standard of living and lower carbon emission. As India tries to increase its standard of living, their output is increasing. Do Australians have some intrinsic right to a higher standard of living than Indians? That's what the argument of "developing countries need to lower their carbon emissions before developed countries give up an inch" amounts to; developed countries refusing to act while forcing developing countries into stagnant or negative standard of living changes.
Australia needs to do a lot more to bring down its carbon emissions. By doing so, they will develop technologies that will allow developing countries to increase their own standards of living without dramatically increasing their carbon output.
I think the entire populations of Africa, south America, and Asia should be sterilized. After 100 years there will be no people in any of those places, and then they can be declared world natural reserves. 
They should remain unhabited for the eternity. However, they can be used for ecotourism 
All developed nations also need a population reduction scheme. The USA and the EU need to reduce their populations to 30% of what they currently are. This way the remaining population will be able to enjoy a high standard of living without damaging the environment.
Technology, science and a NWO will help us achieve these goals
They should remain unhabited for the eternity. However, they can be used for ecotourism All developed nations also need a population reduction scheme. The USA and the EU need to reduce their populations to 30% of what they currently are. This way the remaining population will be able to enjoy a high standard of living without damaging the environment.
Technology, science and a NWO will help us achieve these goals
If you want to systematically sterilize people, start with yourself, you revolting, psychopathic imbecile.
If this post is a merely a poor excuse for trolling, leave your house and get some air. Maybe go interact with other people, go to a library and educate, maybe grow more than 2 neurons to rub together.
If this post is a merely a poor excuse for trolling, leave your house and get some air. Maybe go interact with other people, go to a library and educate, maybe grow more than 2 neurons to rub together.
Thank you for proving my point. You are unable to hold a smart debate. 
Please don't reproduce.
Cocaine and Diamonds...
I like the way you think.
I like the way you think.
The way we currently obtain them is more cruel, messy and bloody. In addition overflowing the market/legalizing also reduces their value.
Before all these people come after us for what we have done, we should implement a final solution
Before all these people come after us for what we have done, we should implement a final solution
That'd be awesome. 
Do you mean I am not the only cucu here? 
"think the entire populations of Africa, south America, and Asia should be sterilized." First off that's a horrible thing to say. Those people are human beings who have a right to life just as much as anyone else. Second, it sounds like you want to wipe out entire races of people just for their land. You also seem to think that the world is over populated. There are plenty of scientists out there who have disproved that myth. In fact, some are worried about under-population. There are countries in Europe who are facing the problem of under-population. Having less people in the world doesn't improve the enviornment.
Have you visited some of the poorest underdeveloped nations in Africa and South America? These people live in very poor conditions. Trust me, taking them out of their misery is an act of mercy. Letting them breed out of control just makes their lives worse.
I will enlighten you
Here is a wikipedia list of the poorest nations of the world. Look at the map. Can you see? poverty is all over those parts of the world.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_…
If you think living in poverty is fun, and that people over there should continue to breed like rabbits, hence making the problem worst and putting more pressure on the environment you are wrong
Those pseudo-scientist you talk about, don't know the extent of the problem humanity is facing
I will enlighten you
Here is a wikipedia list of the poorest nations of the world. Look at the map. Can you see? poverty is all over those parts of the world.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_…
If you think living in poverty is fun, and that people over there should continue to breed like rabbits, hence making the problem worst and putting more pressure on the environment you are wrong
Those pseudo-scientist you talk about, don't know the extent of the problem humanity is facing
Frankly I never been to those countries, but I have seen plenty of people from those places rise above such poverty. Dictators always say they execute people for their own good. Who are you to say these people have no right to life? Also, the scientists I talk about aren't pseudo, they raise good points.
Don't take my word for this, travel to these places. See and experience the misery of these people. See how they in their struggle to survive damage ecosystems and slowly destroy the planet. Experience how crime is part of their lives.
Then you will understand
Then you will understand
Lesser developed countries should be handed the technology, rather than sold it, so that they can develop themselves without having to make the mistakes we all made.
They would need education, beforehand, though. Lest they accidentally nuke themselves and whatnot.
They only need to be given the technologies to do with generating green power and distributing it.
The rest they will catch onto themselves, including education
The rest they will catch onto themselves, including education
Who would manage and maintain all this technology in the meantime, if not indigenous folks? How would employment and autonomy be affected? What guarantees are there to the said developing nations that the given technologies/equipment don't have other side effects that are unaccounted for?
They would manage. It only takes a few thousand people to manage a countries power systems while the rest of the country gets educated
Personally i'm all for us digging methane out of the ocean and burning it! I haveno kids, so we can break the earth for all i care
Personally i'm all for us digging methane out of the ocean and burning it! I haveno kids, so we can break the earth for all i care