Adieu Accord de Paris

[GMDino]

Heaven forbid the US be a leader and innovator in the next generation of climate control and making the world a better place.

It might cost some money.

So tired of winning.

[*Nately120*]

(06-01-2017, 06:48 PM)Millhouse Wrote: The Paris Accord had some issues involved concerning us. But overall it was a good thing to be a part of as opposed to being out of it with Syria and Nicaragua of all countries.

This is not a move I like at all, and Trump's ignorance and arrogance is becoming more detrimental. He should try to make the Paris Accord a better deal for us, rather than just abandon it completely. But I suppose the advice he gets from Steve Bannon and the "1%" of scientists is good enough. Darn you Biden for not running, and damn you DNC for propping Hillary up there instead.

Hmm, it's almost like Trump isn't quite the super-winningest cutthroat negotiator his fanbase thinks he is.  Oh well, giving up and retreating is also a kind of winning I guess.

[GMDino]

Question:  Other than his base (who think anyone who disagrees with them is an egg-headed elitist) who thinks Trump's idea was a good one?

I'm reading articles about business people (Tesla, GM, etc) that are reaffirming they want to stick with the Paris Accord.

Individual cities (including Pittsburgh) are sticking with it.

What convinced a man who barely understands how to Twitter that this was a bad deal?

[SunsetBengal]

(06-01-2017, 08:16 PM)Dill Wrote: Here is one of those amazing differences between Trumpsters and everyone else.  Clinton corruption was mostly a creation of Fox News and endless investigations and innuendo. One would find no wrongdoing, so on to the next, from Whitewatergate to Benghazi. They did do damage as fishing expeditions which turned up Monicagate and Hillary's email scandal. The tactic was mostly to keep the questions going--appearance as fact.

You should check this out..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash

[GMDino]

(06-01-2017, 09:27 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You should check this out..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schweizer#Criticisms_and_errors

[SunsetBengal]

(06-01-2017, 09:38 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schweizer#Criticisms_and_errors

So he may have embellished a bit on the uranium part?  Meh, writers do that.  However, have you seen the list of excuses that Hillary makes for not winning the election?  Those poor Macendonian content farmers...  Can't make that up, straight from the loser's mouth...

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-01-2017, 09:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: Question:  Other than his base (who think anyone who disagrees with them is an egg-headed elitist) who thinks Trump's idea was a good one?

I'm reading articles about business people (Tesla, GM, etc) that are reaffirming they want to stick with the Paris Accord.

Individual cities (including Pittsburgh) are sticking with it.

What convinced a man who barely understands how to Twitter that this was a bad deal?

The US giving $400m/yr, with the goal of doubling that to $800m/yr by 2020, to other countries... is my best guess.

- - - - - -
Personal Opinion:

I have no problem reducing the US' emissions and pollution and such. Regardless of a person's stance on Global Warming, less pollution is always nice. That said, the US can do that without giving billions of dollars to other countries who may or may not even use it as it's actually meant to be, since it is an unbinding agreement.

So I would have pulled out and then followed what the US needed to do emission-wise anyway, but F giving other folks our money.

[GMDino]

(06-01-2017, 09:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So he may have embellished a bit on the uranium part?  Meh, writers do that.  However, have you seen the list of excuses that Hillary makes for not winning the election?  Those poor Macendonian content farmers...  Can't make that up, straight from the loser's mouth...

So your support for the contention that Clinton was on the take admits he "embellished" (lied) about her role but "eh, writers do that"?

Quote:Schweizer has been criticized for incorrect reporting and conclusions not supported by facts, including in his second book "Friendly Spies". Two Sunday Times (UK) reporters trying to confirm his reporting discovered that alleged facts did not check out and that named sources did not exist or could not be found.[23][24][25] Schweizer admitted he overreached in attacking Hillary Clinton's purported role in approving a Russian uranium deal and falsely claimed that then-Secretary of State Clinton "had veto power" to stop the Russian State Atomic Nuclear Agency (Rosatom) from purchasing Uranium One. Schweizer had suggested Clinton approved the deal as a favor for Clinton Foundation donors.[26]

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schweizer#cite_note-26][/url]
But if want to switch and talk about the election aftermath instead I guess that's cool too.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-01-2017, 10:00 PM)GMDino Wrote: So your support for the contention that Clinton was on the take admits he "embellished" (lied) about her role but "eh, writers do that"?


[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schweizer#cite_note-26][/url]
But if want to switch and talk about the election aftermath instead I guess that's cool too.

Hey man, The POTUS calls her crooked Hillary for a reason..

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 08:43 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: LMAO....not a hint of irony, hyperbole, or blind partisanship in that entire post.  I actually thought the bolded above was supposed to be a joke, but I got to the end and there was no punchline...

Not a hint of counter argument, no counter factuals here, only a soft gurgle emerging from the bubble.

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 10:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Hey man, The POTUS calls her crooked Hillary for a reason..

A lot of people do Sunset, and I gave the reason for that above--a three decade right wing media onslaught against both the Clintons.
Bill raising his speaking fees is a long ways from using the state department to get green cards for foreign businessmen for favors--and it's a very long ways from undoing sanctions on Russia to free up loans for your business, which is a question on the dock in the current investigation. Let us see how the Clinton/Trump comparison looks three months from now.


I am not sure why you linked me to the Schweizer book. That book was part of the above-mentioned onslaught, and Schweizer has been walking back his "facts" ever since.  You have apparently been influenced by that book. Doesn't this confirm my point?

[GMDino]

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 09:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: Question:  Other than his base (who think anyone who disagrees with them is an egg-headed elitist) who thinks Trump's idea was a good one?

I'm reading articles about business people (Tesla, GM, etc) that are reaffirming they want to stick with the Paris Accord.

Individual cities (including Pittsburgh) are sticking with it.

What convinced a man who barely understands how to Twitter that this was a bad deal?

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 08:42 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The fact that some Nations have delayed "commitments", the fact that the US spends money toward the Global Climate Science effort when other Nations give nothing. 

Syria and Nicaragua aren't giving anything at the moment. Can you think of any others who are not giving anything? 

Myself, I would only be concerned about the world's main polluters, like the US China, INdia, and some European countries. It took years to finally get China on board.  All undone now. 

A world leader no can rely on now.

[Belsnickel]

So, what should be noted is that the regulatory rollbacks by Trump and Congress had already made it so we would be non-compliant regarding emissions and what not. So this was more of a symbolic gesture than anything and also shows there is no desire in thr current administration for us t9 be environmentally responsible.

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 08:49 PM)Goalpost Wrote: Basically from what I gathered of Trumps speech, it wasn't that he disagreed with protecting the climate, but rather he questioned the financial aspects of the US's obligations in it.

He did question the financial aspects. Most everyone else is questioning his understanding of those aspects.

Exxon Mobil for example is concerned about market stability in the future.

http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/exxon-mobil-donald-trump-paris-agreement-climate-change/

[Dill]

(06-01-2017, 11:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, what should be noted is that the regulatory rollbacks by Trump and Congress had already made it so we would be non-compliant regarding emissions and what not. So this was more of a symbolic gesture than anything and also shows there is no desire in thr current administration for us t9 be environmentally responsible.

One should not underestimate the "symbolic" dimension here. This is about reliability as much as climate change. The pull out is sending shock waves through US allies.

The French have already weighed in. We will hear soon from the British and Germans, maybe Japanese too.

French president excoriates Trump in English over his withdrawal from climate deal
http://www.businessinsider.com/french-president-macron-trump-english-climate-change-paris-agreement-2017-6

"To all the scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and responsible citizens who were disappointed by the decision by the president of the United States, I want to say they will find in France a second homeland," Macron said. "I call on them — come and work here with us, to work together on concrete solutions for our climate."

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Maybe this will be the thing that brings about the global war that is so desperately needed to thin out the worlds population. Cut the worlds population by a third and then another third after disease and another third after mayhem and skirmishes.

Doubt it, but you never know. The Left is pretty worked up over this even more so than pretty much everything else out there.

If you are smart, you'll know that a third then a third then a third doesn't actually mean total but I'm sure someone will make that out as a problem.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-01-2017, 08:54 PM)GMDino Wrote: Heaven forbid the US be a leader and innovator in the next generation of climate control and making the world a better place.

It might cost some money.

So tired of winning.

When you have the money to spare, it's a good thing, but when the country doesn't have it?

I don't want my grand kids to be paying for decisions made on our watch. Get that effing debt under control so we can get back on track.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-01-2017, 09:02 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Hmm, it's almost like Trump isn't quite the super-winningest cutthroat negotiator his fanbase thinks he is.  Oh well, giving up and retreating is also a kind of winning I guess.

you have to know when to walk away too. 
That's what he's doing, they have 3 1/2 years to get their shit straight before we vote.