I'm willing to bet that per-capita, the US produces far more economic output per KG of CO2 than most of the rest of the world. Like with any statistic, you can slice and dice it any way you want to fit an agenda.

Here's a chart of carbon intensity vs. GDP per capita for various countries:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-vs-gdp

Why don't you slice and dice that based on your agenda and tell us what we should conclude?

Uh...why not the proper comparison, which is GDP per kg CO2? While I believe that GDP is Θ(1) bound to CO2 emissions, any comparison should include those constants. Your chart is missing the connection between kWh consumed and GDP generated.

> the connection between kWh consumed and GDP generated

If you don't mind those numbers being normalised by population size, and CO2 emissions being used as a more relevant metric than kWh, then this chart might be helpful:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capit...

This is just standard CCP propaganda to deflect from the fact that China is the world's highest emitter of CO2. While US emissions have been trending down for the last 10 years, China's emissions have been trending up.

And at the end of the day, CO2 molecules have no nationality: it's why we don't waste our breath criticizing Qatar for having the world's highest emissions for capita when it produced just 0.1% the total emissions of China.

> CO2 molecules have no nationality

if that's the case, why do you think american citizen deserve to pollute a lot more than Chinese citizen? why would being born inside US border somehow makes it ok to pollute more than if you were born inside china

By your logic, if China were to split in 150 small countries, they could pollute as much as they like because technically each of them would be low on the list of highest emitter.

> And at the end of the day, CO2 molecules have no nationality

...which is why per capita is a better measure than per country. Here's a comment from a while ago that shows the math [1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29040704

it's so obvious that per-capita metrics are a far more practical metric to use that I am convinced those repeating this flawed argument have no real interest in tackling climate change