Esther Duflo

We're supposed to be on the roadmap from Baku to Belem, from 300 billion to 1.3 trillion, but it is likely to be a road to nowhere if we continue with buzzwords and with hairy schemes.

The money is difficult to raise.

It's even harder to spend.

Climate negotiators from India, from Africa, are so tired to negotiate with dozens of outfits to access money that should legitimately be theirs.

So there has to be a better way, and I'm here to tell you one better way.

So first of all, how about we stop beating around the bush and try to raise $1.7 trillion for our moral debt to the poor countries?

Can we do that?

Yes, we can.

But let's face it, there is no money to be made saving the life of an old woman in Pakistan.

And this is too much money for philanthropy.

So the money has to come from publicly funded international redistribution.

Now, you're looking at me and saying, she probably was under the rock the last few months.

This is every country in the North starting from the US but not ending there.

It's cutting international commitment, not adding to them.

So how can I go and say, well, how about 1.7 trillion of new money?

So we have to take the money where it is, which is in the bank account of the richest people in the planet and the largest multinational corporations.

Now, before you think I'm a dangerous alien, I'm not talking about expropriation.

The reality is that the richest people on the planet do not pay their fair share in taxes.

Warren Buffett, who is no communist, quipped that he paid less taxes than his assistant.

And it's true, but it's not just in the US.