[Mirioron]

It also means that poor countries are better on these graphs. Does that mean we should encourage them to stay poor?

[KyleOS]

Only if you're arguing on the premise that they can only achieve sustainable economic growth in the 21st century by polluting the atmosphere.

[kbutler]

Historically, that's a reasonable supposition. The hypothesis that poor countries can achieve economic prosperity without emissions requires proof.

[KyleOS]

We're in the 21st-century dude. Point to a time where access to foreign aid, other financial assistance, and tech that would enable economic prosperity on renewable energy is as easy as it is today.

[kbutler]

Foreign aid and other financial assistance coming from polluting countries is neither zero-emissions, nor sustainable. Nor is it a probable route to prosperity. Look at the nations that have received significant foreign aid over the decades. How prosperous are they?

There are three basic camps among people who study foreign aid, if the goal is to lift countries out of poverty: 1) it doesn't work, and creates dependency instead. 2) it doesn't work, but that's because we need more of it. 3) it doesn't work, but if we try more ways of delivering aid, we can find something that does.

Tech is becoming available - not nearly proven to be sufficient, but progressing.

As I said, it requires proof, because there is no country that has progressed from poverty to prosperity without emissions.