I have to ask about the Paris Climate Agreement

[philoshop]

President Trump said no. In no uncertain terms. And I'm sure many here have extensive thoughts about it. I'd like to hear them.

(And I can't let Papist be the only one stirring the pot here). ;-)

[fasteddie]

I believe we are stuck with it until 2020 . The USA is one of 3 countries to opt out of the Paris Climate Agreement . However China continues to build coal fired power plants and will continue to do so until at least 2030 . I think India is doing the same thing . Some theorists believe that if things continue as they are , the Earth's temperature will rise .02 degrees in the next 30 years . 

[Steve D]

After listening to all the hoop la  and being the simpleton that I am ...I believe he chose to leave for financial reasons.

I don't get the feeling he is against reducing emissions but more concerned about dumping money into a pot that has no accountability.

Considering the agreement calls for "The overall agreement asks developed countries to provide $100 billion to the fund" and "The U.S. also pledged $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund, which helps developing countries adapt and mitigate practices to fight climate change."

Backing out now will not save us anything immediately because we are In it until at least 2020 but It may save money later down the road.

Besides.... if we are doing it already voluntarily why dump millions more into it abroad when we can spend some of the money here to provide local companies the chance to step up their game.

 I don't think his claims to provide more jobs will pan out. Hard to say what the real objective is and we will probably never know but it seems un-likely he would go against Ivanka's wishes and some of the others he respects without a purpose.

 Just to bad he won't or can't explain why in a logical manner so every one doesn't get up in arms over it.

The media is already prepared to beat this to death until the next piece of dirt falls. That is one reason I am watching less and less news every day.

[philoshop]

My understanding is that the U.S. is tied to the 'agreement' for some length of time. Whatever that is. That agreement is not a treaty and is not binding in any way, so the U.S cannot be held to any legal responsibilities or proscriptions. There are no actual rules or mandates involved with the agreement.

President Trump said that he will not use U.S. tax-payers money to subsidize the continued poverty of third-world countries, and that he won't subsidize China's manufacturing sector so that they can overtake the U.S. manufacturing sector. This is precisely what the PCA was about from the start. 

[Doc]

Given all the efforts and successes that we have done voluntarily internally here in the US and the volumes and volumes of environmental law that have been adopted by states and federally, why do we have to pour jillions of dollars into some international slush fund to duplicate what we are already doing. Is it really necessary that we fund the environmental activities of the rest of the world. Yes there were many countries that signed on to the accord, but you can bet your bottom dollar that they were motivated by the free-ride provided by US tax dollars offered up for the use by their own countries. When will we get it through our heads that we can no longer finance every country's activities. We are not a bottomless money pit available for the use of every country slick enough to figure new ways of scamming us out of our financial resources. For some reason, we have figured out all kinds of ways of exporting our own internal versions of welfare around the globe for even international concerns to take advantage of. It can't continue. 

[wolc123]

A President went thru the White House door, and did what he said he will do.   We are all now drinking that free bubbalub, and eating that rainbow stew.    

[The_Field_Ager]

While flying about in his gas guzzling jet, on his why to his gas guzzling giant party boat, Leonardo DiCaprio told us all how sad he is at this development 

[Doc]

I am enjoying the fact that we have a president who can look beyond some of these liberal feel-good issues and make some measured decisions that rely on something other than emotion for a change. Watching the left go through another emotional meltdown also provides a certain measure of satisfaction too.

[philoshop]

Watching our president constantly throw fuel into the forge of liberal emotional melt-down. It's a big part of what's fun about winning elections and watching politics..

However serious those on the left attempt to appear in their pleas, I really just chuckle at their inane reactions. Watching leftist news programs is kind of like watching 1970's SNL. You remember, back when it was funny.

Edited June 4, 2017 by philoshop

[Five Seasons]

This is not a left and right issue. those so far stuck to your parties beliefs on one side or the other would do yourself a service by researching this a little more... and not through your typical outlets.

It's very simple. All but 2 countries and now 3 made a handshake deal to better the environment. You may not believe in global warming even though 97% of scientist do. I have a degree in environmental engineering and make my living in the regulations field. I can promise you that the data is real. I can promise you that cutting emissions isn't as hard as you think. I literally have spent 11 years of my life putting simple programs in place to reduce our footprint. And you know what happens when you reduce your emissions? You save money on utilities!

Climate change will not affect you or your kids... but it will eventually impact this planet. I for one don't want to have our ancestors look back at me and ask WTF? Yes people will lose jobs. Railroad workers lost jobs too. So did steam engine builders. We move on and new jobs in new fields are created.

So I ask you this. If this was a non-binding agreement of sorts that even countries like North Korea and Iran signed on to, what's the big deal? Reducing our carbon emissions will reduce our dependency on foreign oil (good for all you Muslim haters out there). It reduces NOx, SOx and VOC which pollute our atmosphere, poison the air we breath and the streams where we fish and hunt. This is something I would assume we could all get behind in this community right?

I have agreed with every move Trump has made thus far. However, I'd rather he focus on the trade issues, health care, continue pushing immigration reform and stay off twitter. This is one issue I can't get behind. The earth should not be political. We may end up paying more than our fair share, but for decades the US was a leader. A champion for all mankind. Please, please, please I beg of some of you. Remove your armor, understand you don't have to rally behind every decision your party makes and know that this more than anything sends a message to your kids and grandkids that money is more important than anything. Again, you don't even need to believe in global warming to know burning fossil fuels is bad for mother nature. Rally behind that.

[Steuben Jerry]

46 minutes ago, Belo said:

So I ask you this. If this was a non-binding agreement of sorts that even countries like North Korea and Iran signed on to, what's the big deal?

I'm all for protecting and improving the environment, but why does the USA have to pay big money (from the United States taxpayers) while other polluting nations (China and India) get a pass and can actually increase their emissions for a few more years?

Sounds like a bad deal.

I heard an analogy the other day that hit the nail on the head. The rest of the countries just realized that the guy that was going to pick up the check just left the restaurant. Now they're upset that they have to pay the tab.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Steuben Jerry

[philoshop]

Belo, I think of it this way. Extremely wealthy people like Al Gore started a big international club which would make them a lot of money. The only part of that club with responsibility for actually paying dues was the U.S. taxpayer and a small handful of unlucky folks in Europe. Trump said no thanks, it's a bad deal.

I'm sorry that your job is likely at risk, but our entire country is at risk when these schemes are allowed to be implemented. I mean the very foundation of our country is in jeopardy. There is nothing "climate" about the Paris accord, just as there was nothing "climate" about the Kyoto accord. They were both wealth redistribution schemes, and my politics really don't have any bearing on that assessment. The arguments on both sides are partisan in many ways, and have been for the last forty years. But the reality is that a political position is not a determining factor when the U.S. and it's citizen taxpayers are so obviously being intentionally screwed for profit.

[Five Seasons]

I'm all for protecting and improving the environment, but why does the USA have to pay big money (from the United States taxpayers) while other polluting nations (China and India) get a pass and can actually increase their emissions for a few more years?
Sounds like a bad deal.
I heard an analogy the other day that hit the nail on the head. The rest of the countries just realized that the guy that was going to pick up the check just left the restaurant. Now they're upset that they have to pay the tab.

They are in different stages in their economic growth. They're not out of it forever. Think again as the US as the leader. Hey we've been there... polluted our rivers and lakes. We can't force you do anything because your people are starving, but let us help.

Btw, we don't have a separate eco system at manmade boundaries. Momma always told you to take of yourself and do your best right?

[Five Seasons]

I'm sorry that your job is likely at risk,

Lol my job is fine. Carbon reduction is a small, small part of my responsibility. And like I said, we do it anyhow. I simply brought it up as an offering of my understanding of the situation. That it's part of my education and my life, unlike the talking heads you bow to.

[philoshop]

Bow to? Interesting reference and terminology. Please continue.

 

[Steve D]

3 hours ago, philoshop said:

There is nothing "climate" about the Paris accord,

Tell that to our DUMB DONKEY governor who continues to support it with our tax dollars as he organizes his resume to make a bid in the next presidential race. Then we can have the "Chris & Andrew" show on CNN.

Edited June 6, 2017 by Steve D

[pt0217]

Nothing personal Belo, but this country would be better off if we could get rid of some of the regulators.

[Doc]

I guess the reality that even we have limits as to how far we can solely finance every fix to all the worlds ills. It is time for countries to begin taking individual responsibility for cleaning up their share of the mess that they create. We do.

Trump is simply saying that we no longer will play the role of the fool when it comes to matters that impact the entire world. Frankly, I am glad the message is out there now that we no longer supply free meals. Even we have our limits. We have to apply pressure to the different countries to act environmentally responsibly, not supply all the resources to do it for them. I think that is Trump's message and determination, and all I can say is, "it's about time, what took us so long?".

[Adkhunter1590]

No issue here with it. I'm all for a clean environment and cutting back emissions as fast as we sensibly and reasonably can. But to fund the entire world to do what we do is just absurd. I can't stand these news people filling the simple minds of your average moron with the idea that we are going to all of a sudden become the biggest polluting country because of this. We are rapidly reducing our pollution every year. Would it be great if the entire world followed suit? Of course, but we can't be expected to pay for it. That's just way too much money to be essentially throwing away because you know damn well a huge portions of it will end up in someone's pocket in a corrupt foreign country.
I'd rather see that money pumped into our companies to create the advanced technology required to keep the future generations clean. And then maybe share/sell such technology with other countries at cost. I'd rather us sell some machinery and stuff at no profit than just hand over billions in cash and hope they do the right thing.

[Steuben Jerry]

15 hours ago, Belo said:

They are in different stages in their economic growth. They're not out of it forever. Think again as the US as the leader. Hey we've been there... polluted our rivers and lakes. We can't force you do anything because your people are starving, but let us help.

Btw, we don't have a separate eco system at manmade boundaries. Momma always told you to take of yourself and do your best right?

Why does the US have to write a check? What about the European countries, don't they have checkbooks? How about NATO countries that are skipping out on their financial agreements? They must have positive checking balances by now.

We don't have deep pockets, we just have record debt and don't need any more.

My Momma taught me to get my house in order first.

[The_Field_Ager]

Meet the People Who Are Grateful for Trump’s ‘America First’ Climate Policy

http://dailysignal.com/2017/06/05/meet-people-grateful-trumps-america-first-climate-policy/

[The_Field_Ager]

Gore admits Paris pact symbolic

Quote

CHRIS WALLACE: “You would agree that even if all 195 nations, now 194, met their targets, it still wouldn’t solve the problem.”

AL GORE: “That is correct. However, it sends a very powerful signal to business and industry and civil society, and countries around the world.” 

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/06/04/gore-makes-false-climate-claims-about-greenland-sea-levels-extreme-weather-on-fox-news/

Edited June 6, 2017 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

Quote

Morano: 'The UN has admitted they will redistribute wealth by climate policy.[Pure Communism] This is all politics, it is not about saving the planet and Trump is calling them on it.'We been called a rogue nation along with Syria and Nicaragua. The U.S was founded as a rogue nation. Trump is showing true leadership. Standing up to the world and say we are not buying belief in superstition that a UN agreement that even if you believe in UN assumptions would have no measurable impact on temps in 100 years or has anything to do with saving the planet or climate. Donald Trump should win a medal of scientific courage and political courage for pulling out of this.'

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/06/02/science-wins-trump-stomps-on-climate-religion-withdraws-from-un-pact-round-up/

Edited June 6, 2017 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

 

[philoshop]

Trump has the stones to call out the 'curtain-twitchers' on this issue, and many others. The world is not going to end because the U.S. refuses to subsidize the economic rise of China and the institutional poverty of Burundi. We have our own issues that need to be addressed.