This is going to change in pretty much a month. Car makers make more money selling combution engine cars, but emission guidelines are hard in 2025, hence they need to sell more EVs. So EV prices will drop and sales increase. That has been the case in the past as well. It is going to 37% plug in or so.
Fascists hate Communists, but love other fascists.
The global GDP is about $100Trillion. So $300billion is 0.3% per year. It is meant for climate finance and a massive sum, which makes it pretty certain that something ends up in something climate related. Especially with the US likely to leave, which leaves most payers being fossil fuel importers. So they have much less of a reason to promote fossil fuel development. Obviously though a lot of the money will end up in the hands of the rich, thanks to corruption in every country involved.
$300billion is a lot of money. In 2019 the US gave $34billion in aid total or put in another way it is more then 10% of the GDP of Africa. So if the money actually goes where it is needed, it is enough to change a lot. As in solve world hunger and so forth.
And yes obviously this has to be done well. The amount has to be fair, but also the pay out mechanism. As in rich big polluters pay the poor low polluters and the average do nothing, but help themself. Also it has to be made sure, that this is not just a way to pay dictators and a hell of a lot more.
But any settlement like this would be historic and the fact, that they are talking about it is seriously great news.
She is talking about the year 2000. It took 8years for the war in Ukraine and 14 until he took Crimea and 22 years until the full scale invasion. Is it really that hard to imagine that Putin is not some incredible mastermind, but does something big, when he believes there is a good chance of success or something else changes. In 2008 Georgia had made moves to join NATO, so Russia intervened. 2014 was the Orange Revolution and Ukraine was weak, so he attacked. If he wanted to take all of Ukraine all the time, that was actually also the perfect moment for that. However it took him until 2022, when he thought the West was weak due to Covid and a lot more propaganda, for him to attack. It might also very well be that he changed his mind on a lot of things, being in power for over two decades and yes the behavior of the West certainly was part of it.
Not directly, but she did say that the Bucarest Summit lead to the invasion of Georgia in 2008.
Increasing interest rates is not going to work too well. The idea behind it, is to slow down borrowing hence slowing down demand and with that lowering inflation. That just does not work, when the government spends a lot of money on say a war. The other way it works is by attracting international investors due to higher profits. Obviously seizing assets from foreign investors is not helping with that either.
The only way Russia can actually lower inflation and continue the war is by using its foreign currency reserves and buying foreign products to increase supply in the market. In the case of Russia the foreign currency reserves is part of the sovereign wealth fund. So look out for that.
GDP of the least developed countries is currently $1.5Trillion. For them $250billion would be a massive help.
Also Panama as a high income country. That they are asking developed countries for money is strong. I do get that the definition between high income and developed is a bit different, but Panama is rich enough to pay for its own damage and if anything should seriously think about paying into the found.
Obviously. ICBMs are pretty much useless to Ukraine and without nukes to Russia as well. They are acurate enough to destroy something using a nuke. So missing by a few hundret meters is fine. With conventional explosive that is however pretty much useless.
This is most likely the answer for Biden allowing the use of those short range system and it would be wonderfull to see Russia blow up its nuclear missiles for nothing.
Intressting. So by delivering more of them to Ukraine we lower Russias arsenal.
The EU still has more soldiers, tanks, planes and so forth then Russia, even without the US. The reason to increase military spending is mainly to make sure Russia does not attack, as that would be even more expensive.
At the same time talking about capabilities is important. However there also needs to be a discussion about potential threats. For example the EU imports nearly all of its fossil fuels, mainly from countries it does not like too much. So reducing fossil fuel consumption might be a better investment, then military spending for some foreign mission. Similar story with China and manufacturing.
The debt Biden canceled was own to the US government. So this would have been good for Ukrainian bonds, as it makes them more likely to be paid back.
When a radioactive roch is stored in a cave somewhere instead of stopping to produce crypto currencies: 🤬🤬🤬
The Democrats can not pass any new laws, since the Republicans hold the House. So the only power they have is that of the president. However Trump can reverse a lot of that as soon as he gets into office. However in foreign policy that is often not the case. For example Ukraine is not going to return US weapons, just because Trump got elected. Also those things are often more important.
Also only two comments mention plastic at all, which is odd given the topic.
China’s per capita emissions are also waaay higher then those of the EU for example, while the EU’s emissions are falling and China’s are rising. Also China’s emissions fall by about 10%, when you adjust for trade.
The big problem is more that the countries most responsible for climate change is changing. The West emissions are falling, whereas non Western countries emissions are rising. So the West argues that climate reparations should be paid by the countries emitting the most and not by the countries who have the most money. They are related, but not the same. Also that that bases needs to be adjusted over time.
The US under Trump is going to pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement and probably no longer going to COPs. They are the biggest supporter of Israel and climate reparations are going to be a very hard sell, with the largest historic emitter not paying anything at all. Actually it is even worse as the US already is giving less then other historical emitters. So best case is that mainly Europe pays for the US share as well and stops its support for Israel.
Also the headline is deliberatly missleading. Gaza is obviously not a massive topic at a COP.
The original press release:
https://globalcarbonbudget.org/fossil-fuel-co2-emissions-increase-again-in-2024/
How the hell can the presidential candidate of the Green Party own a MILLION DOLLARS OF OIL AND GAS SHARES? How can you complain about Israel murdering children in Gaza, when you own shares in Raytheon, which sells and produces weapons for and in Israel?
And this is what happens when the Russian economy collapses. The good part that this means Russia can produce less weapons. However the struggling families will sell their men to Putin to survive. So we will see even higher losses for the Russians. By the end of this Russia will be done as a great power.