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.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,184 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19507
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by bertwrench
That's all fine, but you didn't answer my question. How does this help the average American worker? Why not keep the money we would pay into this accord and use that for building our own clean energy infrastructure? Why sign an agreement that has no teeth and lets China and India get to pay nothing in some instances and little in others, while the US (and others) pay more?
It seems the best way the US can lead is to actually do things to move forward, not sign some virtue signaling accord that costs the taxpaying family money.
The US is not paying that much, indeed Europe puts twice as much in to the Green Fund.
The US contribution is around $3 Billion.
The move to cheaper cleaner alternatives to fossil fuels helps everyone, it leads to a cleaner environment to live in, cheaper energy for industry and a new energy sector.
In terms of China they are investing heavily in green energy and transportation, as part of current and future plans, whilst India which is less advanced is also committed to long term strategy.
Both countries have good rail infrastructure and have the ability to harness a lot of clean energy.
It does nothing but hinder the countries that abide by it, as long as China and India continue to spew and pollute.
You want o really help the environment? Get China and India to abide by it.
Act like we didn’t do the same at same stage of economic progression. Eventually their people will demand change too. They’re already paying for it with filth and smog.
The US is not paying that much, indeed Europe puts twice as much in to the Green Fund.
The US contribution is around $3 Billion.
The move to cheaper cleaner alternatives to fossil fuels helps everyone, it leads to a cleaner environment to live in, cheaper energy for industry and a new energy sector.
In terms of China they are investing heavily in green energy and transportation, as part of current and future plans, whilst India which is less advanced is also committed to long term strategy.
Both countries have good rail infrastructure and have the ability to harness a lot of clean energy.
Only nine countries who signed on to the agreement have paid anything - the US being one of them. China - zero. Our friends in India - nothing. China is actually taking the preferred route. That is not contributing anything to this fund that robs its own people and keeping it in house. I don’t know if China is actually doing anything but in theory that is the better route. We should not be paying for other countries’ environmental concerns.
Democrats seem so two-lipped. On one. Hand they claim they are for the American family and worker but then they support giving money to other countries for doing nothing. It’s something that can’t be reconciled.
So if others engage in irresponsible behavior then everyone should just do it too ?
Environmental damaged takes decades to repair.
This is the problem with the phony Paris accord. It is not binding and only nine of the signees contribute anything. How about everyone just do their own thing and let the world powers put social pressure on them to do things? Keep American taxpayer money at home except for in cases where our national security is at risk. We can’t dictate what other countries should be doing environmentally. We need to take care of our own house.
This is the problem with the phony Paris accord. It is not binding and only nine of the signees contribute anything. How about everyone just do their own thing and let the world powers put social pressure on them to do things? Keep American taxpayer money at home except for in cases where our national security is at risk. We can’t dictate what other countries should be doing environmentally. We need to take care of our own house.
It’s pretty obvious you really haven’t read anything about the Paris accords.
Because it's only a commitment to work towards better environmental standards and leaves it up to each nation as to how they achieve this.
No mechanism forces a country to set a specific emissions target by a specific date, and this allows nations to decide targets for themselves.
The Paris Climate Accord does not force the US is to anything other than trying to reduce emissions and to try to tackle environmental problems.
Other countries are currently doing far more than the US, and they are not complaining.
Biden and the Dems are doing the right thing by rejoining the Paris Accord, and in terms of the environment.
The US needs to take a leading role in alliances and reestablish itself as a global leader.
Are you sure?? last time I check, Canadians upset about the carbon taxes but Justin Trudeau doesn't care.
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.
