[jstanley]

> Then the bottom 50% who collectively emit 7% could triple their emissions.

> Is it me, or is 100% - 15 + 7*3 > 100?

You're counting the 7% too many times.

If the 7% were tripled it would be 21%, which is an increase of 14%, which roughly corresponds to the reduction of 15%.

100% - 15 + 7*2 = 99.

[ars]

Thank you! That makes sense.

So given that the net results of this shuffle is zero, I guess that confirms that this article isn't about CO2, it's about inequality.