President Trump Pulls U.S. Out of the Paris Climate Accord

[NAM001]

^^ Hmm.. This is @Storker making reference to the 1st Amendment. Since most of us don't know what country is Storker's home, maybe we should assume a reference to the USA's Constitutional 1st Amendment?

**After al,l this is a thread topic on a US policy, right?



^^And here is @Storker again complaining that somebody else referred to the 2nd amendment and declaring it to be off topic.

Got to love the grade school name calling "Cheeto-in-chief". And the condescending tone regarding our countries Constitution. I know we are far from perfect, but this contempt and disrespect makes me wonder why even bother dipping into a thread on US policy. Maybe fix your own house first before tossing stones our way dude!

Just out of curiosity, what country is Storker from? Just wondering, because surely they must be a model of environmental, humanitarian and economic harmony.

Do you think he suffers from but hurt because we learned about the pit falls long ago in the 1700's which made us draw our constitution is its constructed form. And it is the magna charter with a bill of rights added in its basic form.

 

[adurso]

This has been explained numerous times but once more apparently. The biggest problem that should piss you off the most is that cited in the agreement (China and India specifically) are allowed to build an unlimited amount of coal fired plants with no time limit.

As I mentioned before, the largest polluters will only continue to pollute and not cut their emissions for at least another 13 years. This information is publicly available if you want to refute my claim.

The world expected the US to make many payments in the coming years to the Green Climate Fund. An amount that would be close to a $100 billion, by far the largest contributor to the fund using government funds AKA tax dollars. This does not include private businesses and corporations who would add another few billion. This amount would be triple what the rest of the world would contribute to the fund.

@Storker, the people of the US has shouldered the burden of the world for the last 75 years. We have sacrificed millions of our troops in EVERY theater in the world for your own freedoms in Europe . Don't you lecture us on not being focused on the rest of the world as we are the ones who protect. Maybe Europe should deal with its terrorists and new founded Russian Empire on its own.

@adurso, now name me the benefits to us if we stayed in the agreement... That's non enforceable

My question has been, and remains, what negative effects result from the US withdrawal from the Paris Accords?

So far the responses have been vague references to "leadership", "China", "Mean Orange Man".

 

[Joneill]

My question has been, and remains, what negative effects result from the US withdrawal from the Paris Accords?

So far the responses have been vague references to "leadership", "China", "Mean Orange Man".

It seems one large effect is that a source of funding for the wealth redistribution aspect of PCA dries up - though I don't consider that a negative effect.

The US can (and should) still be a leader in reducing emmissions and developing and deploying sustainable energy technology - we don't need to subsidize the rest of the world to accomplish that!

 

[kelemvor]

My question has been, and remains, what negative effects result from the US withdrawal from the Paris Accords?

Lots of whining. I mean lots. That's par for the course in this day an age, but it's still been the most significant negative effect.

 

[Caveeagle]

It seems one large effect is that a source of funding for the wealth redistribution aspect of PCA dries up - though I don't consider that a negative effect.

Progressives don't even try and deny moves to redistribute wealth within our country. This really IS about scaling this ideology to the global level. When you consider living at the "poverty level" in the USA probably puts you into the top 25% Globally, you can start to see where this is going.
>>I wonder how this would impact voting in the US if/when it becomes more clear that a big part of the 'climate change' politics if about lowering the standard of living for Americans, in an effort to equalize for parts of the globe that have failing economies.

..The US can (and should) still be a leader in reducing emmissions and developing and deploying sustainable energy technology - we don't need to subsidize the rest of the world to accomplish that!

Anyone who really thinks the US will not continue to be a leader in the evolution of technology is just obtuse. Although government forces seem to be very effective at killing growth and true innovation in favor of idiotic "feel good" measures that could never survive in a free market environment. ie: Solyndra. Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post

 

[kelemvor]

Progressives don't even try and deny moves to redistribute wealth within our country. This really IS about scaling this ideology to the global level. When you consider living at the "poverty level" in the USA probably puts you into the top 25% Globally, you can start to see where this is going.
>>I wonder how this would impact voting in the US if/when it becomes more clear that a big part of the 'climate change' politics if about lowering the standard of living for Americans, in an effort to equalize for parts of the globe that have failing economies.



Anyone who really thinks the US will not continue to be a leader in the evolution of technology is just obtuse. Although government forces seem to be very effective at killing growth and true innovation in favor of idiotic "feel good" measures that could never survive in a free market environment. ie: Solyndra. Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post

Wow, I always wondered what happened to that company. Actually, I still wonder. The article focuses on political ties to Obama and didn't get into what the actual problems were.

 

[Caveeagle]

Wow, I always wondered what happened to that company. Actually, I still wonder. The article focuses on political ties to Obama and didn't get into what the actual problems were.

I thought the same thing. It's unfortunate that if you don't just blindly drink the 'climate change kool aid' you get accused of supporting pollution and wanting to see all sorts of horrible things happen. I remain very open minded about what's "really" happening with our environment. I just can't help smelling a little BS surrounding most of these political activists that have hidden agendas.

I have done a lot of work on resource conservation projects, and spent many hours of volunteer time doing environmental clean-up type projects, so I get a little offended when somebody says I want factories dumping pollutants into our water. It is just NOT true. I do want MY country to be a leader in finding ways to improve our lives and protect our planet so my kids can enjoy it to the fullest.

Now, lets pressure China and India to get with the program and clean up their act if they want to be respected as a world leader. The USA already IS that.

 

[kelemvor]

I do believe climate change is real. I just don't believe that the Paris agreement was the right path for our country, or the world.

 

[Caveeagle]

I do believe climate change is real. I just don't believe that the Paris agreement was the right path for our country, or the world.

Of course climate change is "real". The question is: to what degree has human activity made it worse. Right? I know its is not 100% driven by humans. That's just ridiculous. The earth's climate for the last 500 years is actually more stable than what geological evidence shows for most of the ~4.5b years. There are real reasons to be skeptical of the activists. The 70s-80s we were all convinced another ice age was on the way. Then global warming was the big fear. Now we just call it "climate change" because that the only logical next step... right? If you listened to All Gore, the polar ice caps should already be completely gone by now. I should be living on coastal property base on all the "science" from the late 90's.

Now.. please put your pitch forks away!! I am not saying that man-made pollution isn't a problem!

I have seen the DATA on C02 emissions and don't need a lecture on how much plastic is collecting in our oceans. I get it! We need to do a better job taking care of our planet! I just refuse to be quiet when some people try to sell my country down the river to over-compensate for the nations that are doing virtually nothing to improve things.

...And fly around the globe on private jets while doing this!!

 

[Storker]

Of course climate change is "real". The question is: to what degree has human activity made it worse. Right?

Are you a scientist? I am one. And because I am one, I'd never dream about second-guessing climate scientists. Because I know how much advanced knowledge that goes into a scientific publication.

But non-scientists apparently know better. About science. Go figure.