• danielbln@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fair, if the US can’t make the guarantee that some wannabe dictator will slip into power after the next election cycle, who can?

    • lasagna@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are many arguments to be made here but this isn’t one. The money can have conditions attached to it. For example, give an amount now and agree to some target being reached within 6 months and so on.

    • Zaktor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not like the rich countries are self-evidently sober and stable in their politics and climate impacts. The richest one just had their own wannabe fascist and has both been responsible for a large part of emissions and rarely met their climate goals.

  • ratskrad@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it makes sense though. Developing countries need to use their own resources to develop, but richer countries are guilt-tripping them not to without providing any alternatives, and they need these countries for the carbon credits 😬

  • deafboy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why does the this life feel like a southpark episode? And what is the safeword? I want out!

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nature doesn’t need money but men need money to compensate them for doing things.