@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion It doesn't matter whether China "catches up". Continuing to pump out that much current CO2 is unsustainable. Whataboutism on this will cook the planet.
It's impossible for the smaller CURRENT emitters to solve it, only larger CURRENT emitters can cut (capture is implausible)

@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion 中国是否“赶上”并不重要。继续抽出这么多当前的二氧化碳是不可持续的。 Whataboutism 在这将烹调这个星球。
较小的电流发射器不可能解决它，只有较大的电流发射器才能切割（捕获不可信）

@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion It's 27% (in US). The other sectors are very large.

@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion 这是 27%（在美国）。其他部门非常大。

@MilitantHobo @Marco_Piani @Noahpinion @OestaOne No, if Monoco had very high per capita, it would still be COMPLETE a waste of time to focus on Monoco. Total amount matters.
Anyway, the bigger story here is the trajectory, not so much the amount. Per capita is converging.

@MilitantHobo @Marco_Piani @Noahpinion @OestaOne 不，如果 Monoco 的人均收入很高，那么专注于 Monoco 仍然是完全浪费时间。总量很重要。
无论如何，这里更大的故事是轨迹，而不是数量。人均正在趋同。

@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion Transportation is 27% and that includes everything not just cars.

@acruiz @dangroshev @WitchKing03 @Noahpinion 交通是 27%，这包括一切，而不仅仅是汽车。

@Giampa_ok @Noahpinion @freddier https://twitter.com/Noahpinion...

@Giampa_ok @Noahpinion @freddier https://twitter.com/Noahpinion...

@Marco_Piani @Noahpinion @OestaOne I think his point is policy. If you want to uncook the planet you need to deal with China. Per-capita ignores that China has so many people that the planet STILL depends on dealing with china even if per-capita is relatively low. With that trajectory it may not be for long anyway

@Marco_Piani @Noahpinion @OestaOne 我认为他的观点是政策。如果你想解开这个星球，你需要与中国打交道。人均忽略了中国有这么多人口，即使人均相对较低，地球仍然依赖于与中国打交道。有了这样的轨迹，无论如何它可能不会持续很长时间

@mattyglesias My theory is that the president has to deliver at least somewhat on the promises to all of the party members who gave endorsements and otherwise aided in getting elected. That pulls the president's policies away from the median voter, which triggers the thermostat.

@mattyglesias My theory is that the president has to deliver at least somewhat on the promises to all of the party members who gave endorsements and otherwise aided in getting elected.这使总统的政策远离了中间选民，从而触发了恒温器。

@jasonfurman You could get past a lot of (1) by basing the rebate on the previous year's bill.

@jasonfurman 您可以通过根据上一年的账单获得回扣来克服很多（1）。

@lagunaqueen @YouAreLobbyLud What I wrote applies to all of them. None of them behave like a chain link fence. At all. Obviously the N95 filter BETTER.
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@lagunaqueen @YouAreLobbyLud 我写的内容适用于所有人。它们都不像链节围栏。完全没有。显然N95过滤器更好。
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@itosettiMD_MBA "Reinfections are rare"

@itosettiMD_MBA “再感染很少见”

@AmoneyResists Loudly quoting NYT is encouraging that audience to do whatever NYT says is bad.

@AmoneyResists 大声引用《纽约时报》是在鼓励观众做任何《纽约时报》说的不好的事情。

@RadCentrism China (+others) has demonstrated that dynamic lockdowns can eliminate. Probably also that frequent enough testing and isolation (as per Mina) can also eliminate. No one has really tried it with superb ventilation, but I bet that would be a third way to eliminate.

@RadCentrism 中国（其他）已经证明动态封锁可以消除。可能也可以消除足够频繁的测试和隔离（根据 Mina）。没有人真正尝试过它具有出色的通风效果，但我敢打赌这将是消除的第三种方法。

@RadCentrism Ventilation is probably all you need (apart from a minority of situation where it is impossible). I remain unconvinced that circulation would continue based only on outdoor-level transmission. No circulation = elimination = no prevalence = nothing more needed.

@RadCentrism 通风可能是您所需要的（除了少数不可能的情况）。我仍然不相信仅基于室外级别的传播会继续流通。没有流通=消除=没有流行=不再需要。

@RadCentrism But for (1) the standard may have to really be "nearly". There are a lot of people pushing 800 ppm as "good" ventilation, that's not terrible but not close to outdoors.

@RadCentrism 但是对于（1），标准可能必须真正“接近”。有很多人将 800 ppm 推为“良好”通风，这并不可怕，但离户外也不远。

@RadCentrism I think (1) is probably enough to get close to full elimination. (2) might be helpful to achieve (1) in practice and (3) helpful to address situations (e.g. old buildings, hard or impossible to retrofit) where (1) isn't achievable.
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@RadCentrism 我认为（1）可能足以接近完全消除。 (2) 可能有助于在实践中实现 (1)，并且 (3) 有助于解决无法实现 (1) 的情况（例如，旧建筑、难以或不可能进行改造）。
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@Dealiah3 @Sara_Tonyn @PeterVroom1 @Scotswoman06 Too long because it still encourages appointing young inexperienced judges more likely to serve out the full 18 years. 60 year old judges at the peak of their career become a liability. I'd say 8-10 years or so.

@Dealiah3 @Sara_Tonyn @PeterVroom1 @Scotswoman06 太长了，因为它仍然鼓励任命年轻的缺乏经验的法官更有可能服务满 18 年。处于职业生涯巅峰的 60 岁法官成为累赘。我会说8-10年左右。

@VolatilityWiz It is and that explains a lot, plus generational income inequality. People entering the economy went through a great depression. Comfortable boomers didn't even notice.

@VolatilityWiz 这解释了很多，加上代际收入不平等。进入经济的人经历了一场大萧条。舒适的婴儿潮一代甚至没有注意到。

@ParentMishmash @michaelmina_lab Yeah both is the right answer. I think that's the bottom line. I don't really understand the effort to somehow frame them as oppositional.

@ParentMishmash @michaelmina_lab 是的，两者都是正确的答案。我认为这是底线。我真的不明白以某种方式将它们视为对立的努力。

@michaelmina_lab @ParentMishmash I'm pretty sure that every single person in this thread is vaccinated, for example. Who are we telling to get vaccinated exactly, and why?

@michaelmina_lab @ParentMishmash 例如，我很确定该线程中的每个人都接种了疫苗。我们告诉谁接种疫苗，为什么？

@michaelmina_lab @ParentMishmash Is your objection that anyone ever talks about anything other than vaccines without also talking about vaccines. Doesn't that seem a bit over the top, especially at this point when vaccine receptive are almost all vaccinated (in HIC)? I'd probably say differently in early 2021.

@michaelmina_lab @ParentMishmash 你反对任何人谈论疫苗以外的任何事情而不谈论疫苗。这看起来是不是有点过头了，尤其是在接受疫苗的人几乎都接种了疫苗的时候（在 HIC 中）？我可能会在 2021 年初说不同。