Hacker News Reader

Comment by throw9away6 | Hacker News Reader

Game theory says that considering climate change when China doesn’t is their wrong move. Dispite the fact that it produces a worse outcome compared to cooperation.

Nothing really terrible about this. It’s not really anti climate it’s about not using things with no defined value in project proposal considerations.

View on HN

There's a game-theory solution to this, which is to impose a tax on imports from countries in order to make up for their lack of aggressiveness in addressing climate change, aka, a border-adjustment mechanism. It's not perfect, but it provides a way to encourage every country to work together by punishing ones that don't. It also discourages industries from outsourcing in order to skirt environmental regulations.

Climate change isn't a game. It shouldn't be viewed in terms of win/lose.

If we actually start doing something about the problem and China doesn't, there will be a lot of pressure on them to do so as well. Or risk exclusion from global markets.

I don’t think the USA could put any more pressure on China then it already has without hurting themselves

> Game theory says that considering climate change when China doesn’t is their wrong move.

because?

> when China doesn’t

this sounds wrong. source?

> no defined value

are you familiar with the concept of an expected value?

Saying there's no defined value is just plain willful ignorance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com