In a geopolitical sense, they are more useful to us right now for two reasons:
Any shot that hits Tesla hits America incredibly effectively as Tesla is one of the Magnificent 7, which means it has an outsized effect on the American markets/economy.
Showing America that the world is ready to decouple from it and support to its rival over this nonsense is a powerful signal/threat.
Which is more of a threat, the bear actually threatening to eat you or the one an ocean away?
And to make things more interesting, which is worse for the world, the country doing their damnedest to make climate change worse or the one that has essentially single-handedly made solar power a viable alternative?
Source on the abandoning decreasing emissions? They’re shuttering coal plants, starting the world’s largest hydro electric project, pumping out the next generation of EV cars, massively funding green tech etc. And I’m hard pressed to find anything comparable in America’s course.
And sure, bears can swim but few can do so over an ocean. Even a casual understanding of modern history or an ounce of common sense should show you how much easier it is to invade a country next door than it is to maintain supply lines across an ocean.
Much of China’s demographic downturn is the result of its one-child policy imposed between 1980 and 2015. Couples have been allowed to have up to three children since 2021.
However a rising number of young Chinese are opting to not have children, put off by the high cost of childcare or an unwillingness to marry or put their careers on hold, while gender discrimination persists.
Authorities have tried to roll out incentives and measures to encourage couples to have babies, including expanding maternity leave, financial and tax benefits for having children as well as housing subsidies.
But China is one of the world’s most expensive places to bring up a child, relative to its GDP per capita, a prominent Chinese think tank said last year, detailing the time and opportunity cost for women who give birth.
China’s CO2 emissions grew 565 Mt in 2023 to reach 12.6 Gt. This represents an increase of 4.7%, as emissions from energy combustion increased 5.2% while those from industrial processes stayed broadly stable. This occurred despite China’s overwhelming lead in the global clean energy economy. In 2023, China contributed around 60% of the global additions of solar PV, wind power and electric vehicles. From 4% in 2015, the share of solar PV and wind in total electricity generation reached 15% in 2023, close to the level of advanced economies (17%). China’s share of EVs in total car sales was more than double the level of advanced economies in 2023.
However, the growth in clean energy was not sufficient to keep pace with surging energy demand, which increased by around 6.1%
China emits the most out of anywhere and is only set to continue increasing, unless they get overtaken by India as number 1.
I thought you had a typo… You’re unimpressed because China has… population growth?
And yes, in the path to decarbonization, they’ve been explicit that it’s a process. You cannot expect a developing economy to instaneously transition to a net zero economy while growing, that’s an insane ask.
If you read the second article you linked a bit more closely, you’ll note that they are talking about China’s rapid development. It would be absurd to imagine an economy growing that rapidly could do so while keeping their total emissions the same.
Meanwhile though, how does this compare to America? What major decarbonization efforts are they undergoing? To my understanding, they are so hell bent on undoing Green projects that they are even cancelling those that Biden put in red districts in an attempt to shield them from the Republicans almost sociopathic disregard for climate change. So, in a question of whom we’d prefer on climate policy, I’m not quite understanding what the heck you’re trying to say? China’s not perfect but you can see a path to climate neutrality, without wishful thinking, do you see anything comparable at a Federal level in America?
Something China and Elon Musk have in common is this concept of birtherism that old generations need to be replaced via breeding programs. Immigration would easily fix the issue, but too many countries would rather die than let in more brown people.
If you care about Climate and/or Quality of Life on this earth then you should be very clearly against human population increases. The number of people needs to go down or emissions never will.
I’m not advocating for America, especially not for Tesla, I’m saying China is worse. China is a seething boiling pot of hatred and violence that is about to boil over like Cheonma’s cult invading Murim, that is their entire culture: might makes right. If Canada wants EVs they would be better off choosing from one of the many other nations who specialize in automobiles and don’t want to murder them all as part of a contrived sociopolitical scheme to weaken their competitors on the world stage.
In a geopolitical sense, they are more useful to us right now for two reasons:
Any shot that hits Tesla hits America incredibly effectively as Tesla is one of the Magnificent 7, which means it has an outsized effect on the American markets/economy.
Showing America that the world is ready to decouple from it and support to its rival over this nonsense is a powerful signal/threat.
Okay, but you’re threatening the black bear by feeding the young grizzly.
Which is more of a threat, the bear actually threatening to eat you or the one an ocean away?
And to make things more interesting, which is worse for the world, the country doing their damnedest to make climate change worse or the one that has essentially single-handedly made solar power a viable alternative?
China might have low emissions per capita but they’ve abandoned decreasing their capita. Bears can fucking swim.
Source on the abandoning decreasing emissions? They’re shuttering coal plants, starting the world’s largest hydro electric project, pumping out the next generation of EV cars, massively funding green tech etc. And I’m hard pressed to find anything comparable in America’s course.
And sure, bears can swim but few can do so over an ocean. Even a casual understanding of modern history or an ounce of common sense should show you how much easier it is to invade a country next door than it is to maintain supply lines across an ocean.
First of all, I said they’re not decreasing their capita anymore. That means they’re no longer limiting population growth.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-formulate-policies-elderly-focus-boosting-birth-rates-2025-03-05/
Secondly, also yes
https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2023/energy-intensive-economic-growth-compounded-by-unfavourable-weather-pushed-emissions-up-in-china-and-india
China emits the most out of anywhere and is only set to continue increasing, unless they get overtaken by India as number 1.
I thought you had a typo… You’re unimpressed because China has… population growth?
And yes, in the path to decarbonization, they’ve been explicit that it’s a process. You cannot expect a developing economy to instaneously transition to a net zero economy while growing, that’s an insane ask.
If you read the second article you linked a bit more closely, you’ll note that they are talking about China’s rapid development. It would be absurd to imagine an economy growing that rapidly could do so while keeping their total emissions the same.
Meanwhile though, how does this compare to America? What major decarbonization efforts are they undergoing? To my understanding, they are so hell bent on undoing Green projects that they are even cancelling those that Biden put in red districts in an attempt to shield them from the Republicans almost sociopathic disregard for climate change. So, in a question of whom we’d prefer on climate policy, I’m not quite understanding what the heck you’re trying to say? China’s not perfect but you can see a path to climate neutrality, without wishful thinking, do you see anything comparable at a Federal level in America?
Something China and Elon Musk have in common is this concept of birtherism that old generations need to be replaced via breeding programs. Immigration would easily fix the issue, but too many countries would rather die than let in more brown people.
If you care about Climate and/or Quality of Life on this earth then you should be very clearly against human population increases. The number of people needs to go down or emissions never will.
I’m not advocating for America, especially not for Tesla, I’m saying China is worse. China is a seething boiling pot of hatred and violence that is about to boil over like Cheonma’s cult invading Murim, that is their entire culture: might makes right. If Canada wants EVs they would be better off choosing from one of the many other nations who specialize in automobiles and don’t want to murder them all as part of a contrived sociopolitical scheme to weaken their competitors on the world stage.
I simultaneously care about the climate and have a reality based view of the world, which is something I don’t think we share.
Have a good day.