.

Paris Climate Agreement will U.S. stay or go ?

droptopdroptop Member Posts: 8,925
edited June 2017 in General Discussion
President Trump says on Twitter he will be announcing his decision on whether the United States stays in the Paris Climate Agreement at 3 p.m. ET Thursday in the White House Rose Garden.

Will Trump keep his campaign promise and leave or break his promise?

I say, the U.S. will NOT stay in the agreement. A promise is a promise.
«1

Comments

  • Rack OpsRack Ops Member Posts: 18,593 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    We'll stay in.
  • jerrywh818jerrywh818 Member Posts: 2,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This program is nothing but a money giveaway for the USA. Trump will pull out or stop the money and the others will quit.
  • BarzilliaBarzillia Member Posts: 21,851 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It will cost nothing to stay, plenty to leave.

    All the hoopla is an attempt to divert attention from bigger problems.
    "Anger has two children -.hope, and courage." Augustine, Bishop of Hippo

    "Und es wird nicht hineingehen irgend ein Gemeines und das da Greuel tut und Luge,
    sondern die geschrieben sind in dem Lebensbuch des Lammes."
  • bigoutsidebigoutside Member Posts: 19,443
    edited November -1
    The 3:00 planned announcement leads me to believe that someone is going to get jammed for insider stock trading in the next few weeks.


    He's still thinking he's running a reality show.

    #sad.
  • pwilliepwillie Member Posts: 20,225 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The USA has left the building.....good by nothing...
  • Ricci WrightRicci Wright Member Posts: 9,670
    edited November -1
    I will be very disappointed if Trump doesn't get us out of that crapy deal. It's about nothing but money. There is no valid science behind it.
  • Dads3040Dads3040 Member Posts: 13,788
    edited November -1
    The Hillary supporters are predictable.
  • CaptFunCaptFun Member, Moderator Posts: 16,633 ******
    edited November -1
  • us55840us55840 Member Posts: 31,208 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Trump will WITHDRAW from the agreement.

    that will but the financial burden on the other countries and they will not come up with the bucks .. the whole thing will die like it should.
    [^]
    "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." Abraham Lincoln
  • nutfinnnutfinn Member Posts: 12,684 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
    We'll stay in.
    I hope we go, but I think we stay.
  • jltrentjltrent Member Posts: 8,861 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Go................
  • droptopdroptop Member Posts: 8,925
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
    The Hillary supporters are predictable.


    Yep: more predictable than the weather. [:D]
    sun01.gif
  • eastbankeastbank Member Posts: 4,215
    edited November -1
    china does not have to do any thing untill 2030 and then only if they want to, all we get out of it is to give most of the money to keep it going at a snails pace with little impact on the worlds enviroment. get out of it quick. mr myopic.
  • Gun_PoorGun_Poor Member Posts: 241 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    75 billion dollars a year to stay in. He promised to get out during his campaign. He's getting out!
  • DirtyDawgDirtyDawg Member Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I hope his decision is to leave the scam known as Paris Climate Agreement. It hamstrings America, and funnels billions out of u.s. taxpayers. Total sham. If he choses to stay in, it will be one more nail in his re-election coffin.
  • Sam06Sam06 Member Posts: 18,823 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Go

    He promised to get out of it. Its an illegal treaty and it will punish the US.
    RLTW

  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 14,449 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Go. A money pit for the USA.

    Without the USA paying the way, it will die like it should.

    Junk science.
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
  • gunnut505gunnut505 Member Posts: 10,290
    edited November -1
    That idiot o'blammy already signed the damn thing, forcing the US to pay trillions to 3rd world crapholes for absolutely nothing.
    President Trump needs to drop this thing like the turd it is.
  • spasmcreekspasmcreek Member Posts: 38,925
    edited November -1
    canNOT believe the obummer agreement...give em a 15 year grace period....FKNG stoopid sell out ....GET OUT>>>RUN AWAY>>>>>>>>>>
  • ruger41ruger41 Member Posts: 14,386 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hope we get out but his daughter and son in law are putting the bug in his ear to stay. I cannot stand that little a-hole son in law of his. Nothing but a Democrat operator anyway.
  • fishkiller41fishkiller41 Member Posts: 50,608
    edited November -1
  • PacManPacMan Member Posts: 1,555 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
  • ruger41ruger41 Member Posts: 14,386 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Andddd We're out...but says we are renegotiating when possible..sheesh just stay out
  • Dads3040Dads3040 Member Posts: 13,788
    edited November -1
    His statement is masterful.

    Citing the things the other countries are allowed to do, while we are restricted will force the left to explain how the climate is helped by the same activities taking place, but changing who is doing them.

    It will also be fun to see the left try to rationalize the decreases in industry that would be a result of the Paris Accord.

    The path forward to right this country is going to require forcing the left to show themselves and their true allegiance.

    We have seen that they do not support free speech. Only their free speech. They are not tolerant of anyone who disagrees with them.
    They decry violence, and use it to advance their goals. They claim racism is the greatest obstacle faced by minority groups, while those minority groups illustrate daily that they are the worst racists in existence.

    The most important thing we must showcase, is the antipathy to Western Civilization that is central to their worldview. When the Soviet Union was the greatest threat to Western Civilization, the left was starstruck by Communism and its leaders, including Russia. Now that radical Islam is the greatest threat to Western Civilization, and Russia is an ally in the fight against the Islamists, the left begins to hate Russia and support Islamic extremism in all its various forms.

    The underlying brilliance in much of what Trump has been doing is to get the left to stick their rhetorical neck out farther and farther. When it is good and stretched out, swing the axe.
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member Posts: 59,360 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    OZunLzJl.jpg
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • jltrentjltrent Member Posts: 8,861 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
  • Rack OpsRack Ops Member Posts: 18,593 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Admittedly surprised by the decision, but I do think the agreement was illegal under US Law.

    Treaties must be ratified by Congress.....especially something of this scope.

    Barack Obama simply put did not have the authority to do something like that on his own.....no more than Trump could sign us into an alliance with Russia that divided the world between us.
  • ruger41ruger41 Member Posts: 14,386 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'm glad he did it. The amount of money some of these countries wanted(India for one) amounted to extortion imo. Screw em!
  • Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Member Posts: 35,479 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Spot on, Mr. P.
  • wpageabcwpageabc Member Posts: 8,968
    edited November -1
    Like NATO and the UN. The US is a patsy paying the bills for all the leaches that hang on for a free ride...

    Trump should either make the others ante up in the game or pull us out. No more being the loser.
    "What is truth?'
  • droptopdroptop Member Posts: 8,925
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bigoutside
    The 3:00 planned announcement leads me to believe that someone is going to get jammed for insider stock trading in the next few weeks.


    He's still thinking he's running a reality show.

    #sad.


    Nothing was hidden from anyone, Trump has always said he'd get out because it was a bad deal for the U.S.

    Don't think Trump is in this to make money. It's all about History.
  • CaptplaidCaptplaid Member Posts: 20,152 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Globalists can suck it long and suck it hard.

    Globalists can bit it til it bleeds.

    America does not need to take it up the rear for a bunch of snobby Eurotrash and a dam commie pope.
  • p3skykingp3skyking Member Posts: 25,750
    edited November -1
    So the US is through underwriting AlGores scam.

    Wow, weaning the world off the American teat is something new. It's time someone else footed the bill.
  • JunkballerJunkballer Member Posts: 7,903 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yea, we need that 75 Billion dollars to pay the Russians our cab fee to travel into space [:(!]
  • mag00mag00 Member Posts: 4,668
    edited November -1
    I caught part of the Trump Speech on this.

    I think I may start adopting the "red nose" ideology. Punch these idiots in the nose. Let's keep feeding so they keep breeding, then pay money to develop and steal our jobs.

    Trump got the spotlight and is shining it in the corners too.
  • droptopdroptop Member Posts: 8,925
    edited November -1
    The democratic response is same ole, same ole. Lets make america poor again by giving economic advantages to everyone in the world EXCEPT American citizens/workers/business.

    Trump said "you'll win so much you say PLEASE QUIT WINNING, I'm tired of winning. The Democrats are saying PLEASE QUIT LOSING, I'm tired of losing. [:D][:D]

    Didn't understand just how bad the Paris deal was for America. The U.S. dodged the bullet on this Obummer Negotiation.

    Trumps full speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEbraBDj-wc
  • jerrywh818jerrywh818 Member Posts: 2,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by jerrywh818
    This program is nothing but a money giveaway for the USA. Trump will pull out or stop the money and the others will quit.

    I told you so. Trump is for the country. He can't be bought. You nay sayers might as well hang it up. We have a real man in there now. Good buy Ethanol, Good buy wind mills, good buy solar. Hello nuclear, Hello coal. Turn in your welfare cards you freeloaders. There will be a job in town soon. If Republican don't get on the train there will be some nasty primaries soon. Hillary can go ahead and show us her varicose vanes now it's over. Uncle Joe is getting ready to run. That means they have nobody left. Maybe Al Frankin will run. That will be amusing.
    I can hear him now. The Russians are coming the Russians are coming!!!
  • CaptFunCaptFun Member, Moderator Posts: 16,633 ******
    edited November -1
    I love how the headlines are "Sad day for the world... " Yeah, I'd be sad too if I was a foreign power and my sugar daddy deal to suck money from the pockets of the US Taxpayer just got kiboshed.

    Bite it libs...
  • gunnut505gunnut505 Member Posts: 10,290
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by droptop
    The democratic response is same ole, same ole. Lets make america poor again by giving economic advantages to everyone in the world EXCEPT American citizens/workers/business

    Didn't understand just how bad the Paris deal was for America. The U.S. dodged the bullet on this Obummer Negotiation.

    Trumps full speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEbraBDj-wc




    I have the rXv Gene that forces me to read important legislation for myself, instead of just taking for granted that those swamp-dwellers HAD to have my best interest at heart.
    Names of the Bills usually have absolutely Nothing to do with what shenanigans are contained within them.

    But when the price is more than the existing worldwide cash supply, and the check goes to WHOM, exactly?! Those questions needed answers, anyway.
    Look at "news" with an eye toward discovering what they DON'T tell you, be curious about why the same words/phrases appear on EVERY network, listen to the storyline; if it seems gleeful while reporting tragedy, you chose unwisely.
  • BarzilliaBarzillia Member Posts: 21,851 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Fact checking from Politifact reveals a slightly different story than presented above:


    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/jun/01/fact-checking-donald-trumps-statement-withdrawing-/

    Fact-checking Donald Trump's statement withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement

    By Jon Greenberg on Thursday, June 1st, 2017 at 6:28 p.m.


    President Donald Trump announces that the United States will withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement.
    President Donald Trump announced that the United States will withdraw from the Paris accord on climate change. All but two countries signed the agreement. But Trump said the deal puts the United States at a disadvantage.

    "The United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord," Trump said June 1, 2017, "but begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris accord or an entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States."

    The Paris accord had several ambitious goals. Signatories agreed to do their part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and keep the world?s temperature to just 1.5 degrees Celsius above what it was before industrial production took root.

    Each country set its own targets, with reductions to begin in 2020. By mid century, the goal would be zero greenhouse gas emissions.

    President Barack Obama had pledged to reduce emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.

    Wealthy nations agreed to provide $100 billion a year to help developing countries move away from fossil fuels and use more renewable power supplies.

    We reviewed a number of claims Trump made during his White House speech.

    Trump: The Paris Agreement would result in "lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories and vastly diminished economic production."

    Trump cited a number of negative statistics about the predicted economic impact from the climate deal, including a $3 trillion drop in gross domestic product, 6.5 million industrial sector jobs lost and 86 percent reduction in coal production, all by 2040.

    Take these statistics with a grain of salt.

    All of these statistics come from a March 2017 study, prepared by NERA Economic Consulting, that estimates the potential impact of hypothetical regulatory actions necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. The study makes assumptions that gave several economics and environmental professors pause when reacting to the NERA study for ClimateFeedback.org.

    Yale professor Kenneth Gillingham said the NERA model tends to result in higher costs than other economic models. The study assumes certain hypothetical regulations, but "one could easily model other actions with much lower costs," and it also ignores the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, like avoiding the negative effects of climate change.

    Additional professors pointed out that the study assumes:

    ? that other countries don?t make emission reductions in line with the Paris Agreement, therefore leading American companies to relocate;

    ? that industries are static and don?t change to adapt to the regulations, and;

    ? that there would be no increase in clean electricity generation compared to the baseline scenario.

    In other words, the NERA model makes assumptions that generate an extreme result.

    "The NERA model provides useful information, but it is important for it to be taken in context of model results from other models and not cherry-picked as was done here," Gillingham said.



    The Paris Agreement would result in "lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories and vastly diminished economic production."
    In a speech ? Thursday, June 1, 2017

    Trump: "China will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. So, we can't build the plants, but they can, according to this agreement."

    Under the Paris agreement, each country publicly declares how much it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and what it will do to get there. So in that sense, the agreement doesn?t allow or disallow specific actions, like building plants.

    Regardless, China has actually taken steps to stop building coal plants. In January, China stopped construction of 103 new coal-fired plants. The move sidelined scores of projects where work had already begun and put 120 gigawatts of capacity on hold.

    Between the effects of an economic slowdown and an effort to move toward less-polluting sources, China has cut its use of coal three years in a row.

    The key benchmark under the Paris agreement is the overall reduction in emissions. Climate Action Tracker, a project of three research groups, reported in May that "China?s carbon dioxide emissions appear to have peaked more than a decade ahead of its Paris Agreement commitment."

    China has promised that by 2030, it would reduce the carbon intensity of its economy by 60?65 percent below 2005 levels, and increase the share of non-fossil energy to around 20 percent.

    Still, the Climate Action Tracker assessment comes with a warning.

    Researchers said that China?s goals are "not ambitious enough to limit warming to below 2?C, let alone the 1.5?C limit in the Paris Agreement, unless other countries make much deeper reductions and comparably greater effort than China."


    "China will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. So, we can't build the plants, but they can, according to this agreement."

    In a speech ? Thursday, June 1, 2017

    Trump: "Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a two-tenths of one degree -- think of that; this much -- Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100. Tiny, tiny amount."

    Trump?s statement about the amount of temperature reduction expected under the treaty is broadly accurate but needs some additional context.

    According to John Reilly, who co-directs the Joint Program on Science and Policy of Global Change at MIT, the Paris agreement would reduce global temperature by two-tenths of one degree Celsius compared to earlier climate treaties.

    The Paris deal was expected to reduce global temperatures by building on the earlier 2009 Copenhagen Accord, imposing deeper carbon emission cuts on signatories and bringing new countries like China into an international climate pact.

    Yet as the Paris Agreement was under negotiation, Reilly co-authored an MIT report that criticized the deal for not making steep enough cuts in emissions to reach the Paris agreement?s ambitious goal of capping this century?s temperature increases at 2 degrees Celsius.

    "Those pledges shave 0.2 C of warming if they?re maintained through 2100, compared with what we assessed would have been the case by extending existing measures (due to expire in 2020) based on earlier international agreements in Copenhagen and Cancun," Reilly said in October 2015 when the MIT study was published. "We are making progress, but if 2 C stabilization is our goal, it?s not nearly enough."

    However, Reilly said that tackling climate problems depends on taking a series of incremental steps to reduce carbon emissions, and noted that pulling out of the Paris agreement would require even bigger future reductions.


    "Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a two-tenths of one degree -- think of that; this much -- Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100. Tiny, tiny amount."

    In a speech ? Thursday, June 1, 2017

    Trump: "At 1 percent growth, renewable sources of energy can meet some of our domestic demand. But at 3 or 4 percent growth, which I expect, we need all forms of available American energy, or our country will be at grave risk of brownouts and blackouts."
    Trump has consistently argued that the United States economy can grow at 3 percent or 4 percent a year, but that?s not a realistic expectation.

    While that level of growth was common between 1948 and 2005, it hasn?t happened since -- and economists we checked with recently were skeptical that it could happen with any consistency in the near future.

    So that makes Trump?s concerns about growth-related brownouts and blackouts seem unwarranted.

    Economic growth, economists say, stems from two major factors: population growth and improvements in productivity. But neither of these factors are well positioned to drive 3 percent or 4 percent growth, they say.

    The working-age population isn?t growing as fast as it used to due to lower birth rates. And Trump himself wants to curb the other way population can grow -- through immigration.

    Meanwhile, productivity growth is equally out of reach of policymakers. "You can create bubbles to prop up GDP growth for a few years, such as the 2005 to 2008 housing bubble, but to boost productivity growth materially and durably, you need to make important changes over long numbers of years," said Chris Lafakis, a senior economist at Moody?s. "You also need transformative technological innovation, which is not predictable."

    Trump: "India will be allowed to double its coal production by 2020. Think of it. India can double their coal production. We're supposed to get rid of ours."
    India does have plans to nearly double its coal production, and the agreement does not prevent that. But the Paris Agreement does not even mention the word coal, nor does it do anything to put a global moratorium on coal.

    Each signatory has set its own goals and has to report on its progress.

    A 2015 report by the Economic Times, a financial daily from India, discussed a plan of Coal India Limited, a state-owned coal mining company, to double its coal production by 2020.

    The story goes on to give the caveat that the doubling of production is subject to land acquisition and environment clearance, all of which is yet to happen.

    Coal India produces around 84 percent of India's overall coal production, and its decision to double coal production would technically mean India is planning to almost double its coal production.

    "The environment is non-negotiable and we are extremely careful about it," Anil Swarup, the top bureaucrat in the coal ministry, told Reuters in 2015. "(But) our dependence on coal will continue. There are no other alternatives available."

    But is India allowed to double coal production by 2020?

    The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change says the Paris Agreement requires all parties to put forward their best efforts through "nationally determined contributions" (NDCs) and to strengthen these efforts in the years ahead.

    This means all parties will have to regularly report on their emissions and implementation efforts.

    India, in ratifying the agreement on October 2, 2016, said it would follow a path of low carbon commitment in tandem with its national laws and development agenda, including eradication of poverty. India also committed to reduce emissions 33 to 35 percent of 2005 levels by 2030.

    What it effectively means is that the agreement allows the nations who signed the Paris Agreement to set their own reduction targets to help achieve the overall target of reducing the rise in global warming below 2 degree Celsius.

    A final note
    Trump opened his speech saying his team was tracking the terrorist attack in Manila. The most recent reports say that the gun fire that took place at a resort came from a lone man aiming to rob gamblers.


    But don't let those nasty facts get in the way of joining the other two intelligent and forward looking regimes in refusing to sign the accord.......Syria and Nicaragua.


    Great.
    "Anger has two children -.hope, and courage." Augustine, Bishop of Hippo

    "Und es wird nicht hineingehen irgend ein Gemeines und das da Greuel tut und Luge,
    sondern die geschrieben sind in dem Lebensbuch des Lammes."
Sign In or Register to comment.