Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did anyone watch his speech in its entirety today?
I did.
I am an avid believer in taking care of our planet and all life forms on it.
This is one area I have not been in support of around Trump.
I listened to his speech and it makes sense why he pulled out.
Our huge financial obligation to under developed countries.
Under developed countries will not have mandated coal restrictions for years.
They take are manufacturing jobs(jobs are sent overseas), because we have to shut down plants.
The United States already sent $450 billion to this organization and there is no answers to exactly where it is going.
Some of this funding was taken away from Military funds.
I can see why he did this as a way to take care of America.
He said he would like to renegotiate a new deal that did not put most of the burden on America.
I am still torn on Earth and pollution and hoping a new deal can be negotiated.
But everyone, all countries have to step up and have to partake in the same efforts and finances.
But the US has traditionally polluted the earth more than anyone else on a per capita level as well as in absolute terms (until we were overtaken by China). So why shouldn't we pay more? Those underdeveloped countries are underdeveloped and they did not have the industries to pollute the earth. We did and the climate change is happening because of our pollution from the past.....not from them.
Because businesses understand how climate change impacts them, something that Trump seems incapable of:
"Twenty years ago, US corporations were resistant to any suggestions to cut back on their consumption of fossil fuels. Renewable energy sources were expensive and harder to find. And scientific evidence that humans were making the planet warmer wasn’t as strong. That started to change in 2007, when the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published a groundbreaking report, authored by thousands of international scientists, showing overwhelming evidence that carbon emissions from human activity were increasing global temperatures. “It ratcheted up the certainty of this being the issue, and we saw it as a real risk for our business,” said Kevin Rabinovitch, global sustainability director for Mars Inc., which owns brands like M&Ms, Skittles, and Pedigree pet food."
(It's a good article you might want to read the rest of it)
You gotta check your sources. Vox isn't a source I'd exactly be like "Yep yep makes perfect sense". They constantly push SJW stuff...it's like a more serious BuzzFeed.
Rich CEO's from Corporate America don't care about this stuff. They care about profit. That's just how it works. Why do you think they've been silent on almost everything up until this Paris thing, they were set to profit from it. And us taxpayers would be the ones giving them free money.
Sure, a CEO cares so much that you think they'd give up their private jets, yachts, fast cars like Ferarri's and Bugatti's that waste gas and get 9 mpg, giant mansions that eat up a ton of electricity yearly for homes that they're not even there for, etc? You know how bad those things are for the environment that us driving our little Honda Civics down the road?
Until I start seeing these same CEOs give up these luxuries, then I'm with you. But for now, come on. These CEO's pollute the environment more than us regular joes.
99.9% of nations do not have the natural resources that the US has. The only one that is even remotely comparable is Russia. The fact is the untapped energy resources in this country are absolutely enormous.
You just hit on the number one reason 99.9% of nations will move forward with renewable energy, with or without the US. Trump is leveraging those resources using strong arm tactics to put the squeeze on trading partners, which forces them to mitigate that disadvantage. You can argue all day over the legitimacy of climate change, but pollution control policies justify government spending to vital developing industries. Globally, renewable energy is a $1.3T market, it's big and getting bigger https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nathana...rillion-thanks. So, when China and Europe have eventually reduced their carbon footprint with renewable sources, who's going to buy American and Russian hydrocarbons?
Not a counter argument
according to your source, the U.S. share is $3 Billion
Where do you think that $3 billion come from? American tax payers.
It looks like you like to argue about numbers, 10 bil / 3 bil
The poster's point is that tax payers are going to foot the bill. I don't think your source proved him wrong. Sorry.
Good God the other poster said 100 trillion, go back and read it. I'm not arguing about 10 billion vs 3 billon. 10 billion is the total amount countries have pledged, 3 billion is the US share.
Even if the U.S. does provide $3 billion to this fund, it still wouldn’t have contributed the most on a per-capita basis. Sweden has already contributed $581 million, which is nearly $60 per person — the largest per-capita contribution of any country. And Luxembourg has pledged, but not fully contributed, nearly $94 per person, which would make it the largest. In fact, the U.S. ranked 11th in its pledged contribution per capita, after a number of European countries and Japan. It’s also important to mention that, per capita, the U.S. emitted more greenhouse gases than China and India combined in 2015, as we’ve written previously. Trump on the Paris Agreement - FactCheck.org
Trump’s own secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, has said the US should remain in the Paris accord, as has the man who replaced Tillerson as CEO of ExxonMobil. Another key Trump adviser, Gary Cohn, director of the White House National Economic Council, noted recently the large rise in renewable energy in the US. “If you think about how much solar and how much wind power we’ve created in the US, we can be a manufacturing powerhouse and still be environmentally friendly.”https://www.theguardian.com/environm...mate-agreement
Honestly..how can you continue to support Trump's position on this? If you spend 10 minutes fact checking his speech you will realize that he stood up there an lied his a$$ off.
Good God the other poster said 100 trillion, go back and read it. I'm not arguing about 10 billion vs 3 billon. 10 billion is the total amount countries have pledged, 3 billion is the US share.
Even if the U.S. does provide $3 billion to this fund, it still wouldn’t have contributed the most on a per-capita basis. Sweden has already contributed $581 million, which is nearly $60 per person — the largest per-capita contribution of any country. And Luxembourg has pledged, but not fully contributed, nearly $94 per person, which would make it the largest. In fact, the U.S. ranked 11th in its pledged contribution per capita, after a number of European countries and Japan. It’s also important to mention that, per capita, the U.S. emitted more greenhouse gases than China and India combined in 2015, as we’ve written previously. Trump on the Paris Agreement - FactCheck.org
Trump’s own secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, has said the US should remain in the Paris accord, as has the man who replaced Tillerson as CEO of ExxonMobil. Another key Trump adviser, Gary Cohn, director of the White House National Economic Council, noted recently the large rise in renewable energy in the US. “If you think about how much solar and how much wind power we’ve created in the US, we can be a manufacturing powerhouse and still be environmentally friendly.”https://www.theguardian.com/environm...mate-agreement
Honestly..how can you continue to support Trump's position on this? If you spend 10 minutes fact checking his speech you will realize that he stood up there an lied his a$$ off.
Never mind. It looks like you are still arguing about number.
The poster's point is that tax payers are going to foot the bill.
Find a counter argument and prove him wrong.
I am not saying pollution is not a big concern. I am saying the "agreement" is deeply flawed. That's all.
The big bankers like Goldman Sachs don't care about the environment. They were gonna get that big $$$ and now they won't.
Honestly, the regular people who are outraged about the Paris issue...will forget about this in a week and go back to their Starbucks, their cars/Ubers, iPhones, and find the next thing to be outraged about, yet do nothing to really change anything and just virtue signal to make themselves feel better about their life. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat.
The big bankers like Goldman Sachs don't care about the environment. They were gonna get that big $$$ and now they won't.
Honestly, the regular people who are outraged about the Paris issue...will forget about this in a week and go back to their Starbucks, their cars/Ubers, iPhones, and find the next thing to be outraged about, yet do nothing to really change anything and just virtue signal to make themselves feel better about their life. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat.
LOL. The CEO of Goldman tweeted about the Paris Agreement right before he jumped in his gas guzzling Limo and jetted off in his private jet for the weekend no doubt.
The big bankers like Goldman Sachs don't care about the environment. They were gonna get that big $$$ and now they won't.
Honestly, the regular people who are outraged about the Paris issue...will forget about this in a week and go back to their Starbucks, their cars/Ubers, iPhones, and find the next thing to be outraged about, yet do nothing to really change anything and just virtue signal to make themselves feel better about their life. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat.
<nailed it>
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
