• 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle





  • Sure, but that doesn’t fix any of the problems that this article highlights. Large areas of the globe are becoming unhabitable and yet the current policy is to keep people there through subsidies and legal threats for insurance companies instead of actual prevention and mitigation. Basically burying the head in the sand while everyone else is paying the price.

    To quote the article:

    If rebuilding a house destroyed in a “100 year flood” once made sense, now that there’s a “100 year flood” every five years, rebuilding in that locale no longer makes sense. So why should taxpayers absorb the costs of this selective blindness to the realities of rising global risks?

    Solidarity and collectivization of risk is essential for things like healthcare, where your risk is almost entirely depending on luck. But for home disaster insurance, it depends much more kn where and how you choose to build. It then makes little sense why living in particularly dangerous areas should be subsidized. That money should rather go towards climate adaptation.





  • You seem to misunderstand the concept of international law.

    I’m talking about how it is defined in international law

    There are various widely adopted treaties that give specific definitions for crimes against humanity. In this case, the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

    Point is, there is absolutely no way to get states to agree on any of this

    And yet 196 states, including France and Israel, have ratified these conventions (fully or in part). 125 states, including France but not Israel, have ratified the Rome statute and thus accept the ICC jurisdiction. States agree to these treaties because of diplomacy: you get taken less seriously if you don’t ratify these.

    Of course, this system of international law breaks down when states flagrantly break it without repercussions, like Israel and France in this case.



  • Even if you computer is not exposed to the internet: are you certain that every other device on the network is safe (even on public wifi)? Would you immediately raise the alarm if you saw a second printer in the list with the same name, or something like “Print to file”? I think I personally could fall for that under the right circumstances.







  • The 2 percent of GDP target is imaginary. They made it up, in no small part because of lobbying from the defense industry. There is no reason for NATO to spend so much more than all other countries combined.

    Stopping Russia should have been done through economic and diplomatic means. No amount of NATO bombs or tanks would have stopped the invasion. It only would have fueled the flames and given legitimacy to Russia’s claimed insecurity. Economic power is much stronger than military sabre rattling. The EU is founded on that exact principle and it’s the reason why it’s still together.