Adieu Accord de Paris

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-04-2017, 02:43 PM)Dill Wrote: You are arguing that the US ignore Syria and other failed states to save money. Can you calculate the cost of another 9/11?

Leonard, the US would not just be handing Haiti some money while asking them to spend it wisely.

It will be very hard to lower the debt and rebuild US infrastructure AND cut taxes all at once. Republicans want you to gamble that it can be done.
And they are not going to help reduce emissions because the emitters like profits.

I'm not saying Republicans WILL do it. I don't expect it from either of the main parties. That was just my personal opinion, not what I said would be likely.

You can lower debt, rebuild infrastructure, and cut taxes all at once. How much money do you think it costs for some of the things they do?

US Troops around the world...
Germany: ~35,000
Italy: ~12,000
UK: ~8,500
Spain: ~3,000
Japan: ~40,000
Korea: ~23,000
Kuwait: ~6,300
Iraq: ~5,500
Bahrain: ~5,500
Qatar: ~3,000
Turkey: ~2,200
Jordan: ~1,800
UAE: ~1,000
Afghanistan: ~9,300
Djibouti: ~1,900

Plus a couple ten thousand more spread about here and there, plus people deployed out on the water.

Then you figure in that a lot of those places allows for you to bring your dependents with you, and ALL of those places have thousands of more civilian contractors on it.

We're talking well over 120,000 people, plus dependents, plus contractors.. all being housed, fed, and armed (with helicopters, jets, tanks, etc). That is a LOT of money... and that's not even counting the massive cost of actively fighting in multiple warzones. Those 59 tomahawk missles alone were like a $60m attack. The US are installing like $1b-a-pop missile defense systems for other countries. Add in the F-35 project, and some of the other ridiculous waste and you could easily afford to make the US a whole lot nicer for everyone here.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-04-2017, 03:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: They can pull out.

They can cut emissions anyway.

The can keep "their" money.

But the idea behind the Accord was years of negotiating to get the majority of the entire world to work together.  And for the US to be a leader in helping the lesser nations.

1. But small minded people only care about money, and keeping it, so the POTUS pulled out.

A man who not only doesn't understand anything but refuses to learn about it made the decision.  Well, after contacting FOX to make sure he'd get good press from it.

2. I mean I get y'all wanna save a buck...got up that military budget...but to not see that the vast majority of the leaders in the world, plus the majority of US citizens and companies all backed the accord is just blind partisanship and loyalty to the "R" next to the President's name (for now).

1. Feel free to start direct depositing your pay checks into my bank account from now on, since you're such a big minded person and all.

2. I frequently state on these boards that I want to cut military spending. I don't think we need thousands of troops in Spain and Italy. I don't think we need to be installing missile defense systems for Poland. We also don't need a trillion+ dollar stealth jet program for a jet that's shit. I don't give a shit about the "R", and I have to explain this to you every single time because you are under the misconception that if people don't agree with you, they must be Republicans. Everyone you don't like is Hitler, and everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican. The Dino way!

[Nebuchadnezzar]

What was that money used for?

Since the US is no longer part of this thing, does it mean that the US is going to become the worlds lead polluter?

Can US business, inventors and whatnot still invest or create new tech and equipment that is environment friendly?

Is the EPA still in place?

Are companies still regulated to be cleaner?

I just don't get this outrage I guess.  

[GMDino]

(06-04-2017, 03:33 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 1. Feel free to start direct depositing your pay checks into my bank account from now on, since you're such a big minded person and all.

2. I frequently state on these boards that I want to cut military spending. I don't think we need thousands of troops in Spain and Italy. I don't think we need to be installing missile defense systems for Poland. We also don't need a trillion+ dollar stealth jet program for a jet that's shit. I don't give a shit about the "R", and I have to explain this to you every single time because you are under the misconception that if people don't agree with you, they must be Republicans. Everyone you don't like is Hitler, and everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican. The Dino way!

I made no reference to Hitler.  I explained that most people agreed with the Accord (that would include some republicans too).

I said that if you want to get out of the accord you probably also want to increase military spending...that is a Republican thing.  So you would support the "R" no matter who it is.

If those do not apply to you personally do not take them personally.

Thanks!

[GMDino]

Whew!  Lot's of questions!

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: What was that money used for?

To help poorer countries get up to speed and out of the 19th century when it comes to the power generation and generating stations for on.e

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Since the US is no longer part of this thing, does it mean that the US is going to become the worlds lead polluter?

Well we're in second place now...but there is always hope!

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Can US business, inventors and whatnot still invest or create new tech and equipment that is environment friendly?

Absolutely!  And many cities and businesses have already said they would!

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Is the EPA still in place?

Technically.

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Are companies still regulated to be cleaner?

Currently there are still regulations.  However the POTUS has vowed to get rid of those "job killing" regulations.  He eliminated one to keep waterways clear of mine runoff that was just signed in by Obama last December.  Trump blamed it for killing mining jobs.  But then Trump doesn't understand anything about mining except to say he will bring the jobs back.

(06-04-2017, 03:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I just don't get this outrage I guess.  

I guess not.  See, most people want cleaner air and water and good science on the climate of the entire earth.  Some people don't care because it will cost some money to fix decades and centuries of poor management.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-04-2017, 03:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: They can pull out.

They can cut emissions anyway.

The can keep "their" money.

But the idea behind the Accord was years of negotiating to get the majority of the entire world to work together.  And for the US to be a leader in helping the lesser nations.

If you have to bribe Nations into joining, is that really getting the majority of the entire world to work together?

Seems more like bribery to me, not unlike a parent using allowance money as leverage to make a child do chores.

[HarleyDog]

(06-04-2017, 03:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If you have to bribe Nations into joining, is that really getting the majority of the entire world to work together?

Seems more like bribery to me, not unlike a parent using allowance money as leverage to make a child do chores.

Bam!

[Dill]

(06-04-2017, 03:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If you have to bribe Nations into joining, is that really getting the majority of the entire world to work together?

Seems more like bribery to me, not unlike a parent using allowance money as leverage to make a child do chores.

Think of it like this:

You run a large Dairy farm. You grow your own hay and corn.  A poor neighbor owns a pig farm, which is ruining your water source, both ground and river. At the moment the guy has not the resources to grow anything else. But he could turn to hydroponics if he had the investment money, which he doesn't. 

You and the other rich farmers in the region could chip in to help him set up  a station for growing food organically with hydroponics.

Or you could let him continue to ruin the commons while you truck in water from elsewhere.

Oops, bad analogy. There is no "elsewhere" when we are talking about the earth's atmosphere.  

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2017, 03:29 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I'm not saying Republicans WILL do it. I don't expect it from either of the main parties. That was just my personal opinion, not what I said would be likely.

You can lower debt, rebuild infrastructure, and cut taxes all at once. How much money do you think it costs for some of the things they do?

Nope. Current level of revenues covers mandatory spending plus half of the discretionary spending. The entire defense budget is half of the discretionary budget. Infrastructure rebuilding would be more discretionary expenditures. If we cut taxes, further reducing revenues, it would only add to the deficit.

[GMDino]

(06-04-2017, 03:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If you have to bribe Nations into joining, is that really getting the majority of the entire world to work together?

Seems more like bribery to me, not unlike a parent using allowance money as leverage to make a child do chores.

Only if you think of it as a "bribe" rather than a richer nation helping a poorer one.  One's perspective could make it seem like doing some act like helping for the great, common good of the entire planet is a good thing too.

Like when we send BILLIONS to Israel.  Right?

[*Nately120*]

(06-04-2017, 03:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If you have to bribe Nations into joining, is that really getting the majority of the entire world to work together?

Seems more like bribery to me, not unlike a parent using allowance money as leverage to make a child do chores.

Yeah, how could Trump of all people relate to the value of handouts from parents?

[Dill]

(06-04-2017, 03:29 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I'm not saying Republicans WILL do it. I don't expect it from either of the main parties. That was just my personal opinion, not what I said would be likely.
You can lower debt, rebuild infrastructure, and cut taxes all at once. How much money do you think it costs for some of the things they do?

US Troops around the world...
Germany: ~35,000
Italy: ~12,000
UK: ~8,500
Spain: ~3,000
Japan: ~40,000
Korea: ~23,000
Kuwait: ~6,300
Iraq: ~5,500
Bahrain: ~5,500
Qatar: ~3,000
Turkey: ~2,200
Jordan: ~1,800
UAE: ~1,000
Afghanistan: ~9,300
Djibouti: ~1,900

Plus a couple ten thousand more spread about here and there, plus people deployed out on the water.
Then you figure in that a lot of those places allows for you to bring your dependents with you, and ALL of those places have thousands of more civilian contractors on it.

We're talking well over 120,000 people, plus dependents, plus contractors.. all being housed, fed, and armed (with helicopters, jets, tanks, etc). That is a LOT of money... and that's not even counting the massive cost of actively fighting in multiple warzones. Those 59 tomahawk missles alone were like a $60m attack. The US are installing like $1b-a-pop missile defense systems for other countries. Add in the F-35 project, and some of the other ridiculous waste and you could easily afford to make the US a whole lot nicer for everyone here.

Leonard, I have been in most of those countries. In fact I could correct some of your figures. E.g. the airbase in Qatar alone has about 11,000 US service personnel, plus contingents of our NATO allies.

I agree with you that we are in too many places and should cut military waste. Where we differ, perhaps, is in what we think the US gets in return for this spending on bases around the world.

One return on this spending is the kind of world leadership which privileges US markets and currency. This return is direct and indirect. When the US acts responsibly, the world has more stability than it would otherwise. That is good for US jobs and profits. There has not been a world war since 1945. No reason to suppose this would continue without the ability to project military/economic power.

I am puzzled that so many people think the US economy will be just fine if another world currency arises to compete with the dollar, and/or if China, Russia, and India begin establishing bases in the Mediterranean, South America, the Caribbean or even Canada.

When the US was attacked on 9/11, it had the power to respond in Afghanistan, asking no one's permission. And it had the backing of 28+ allies. Imagine we suffer another 9/11 10 years from now and we have to get permission to respond, and we don't have such an array of allies behind us?

Clearly, when the US uses bad judgment, the results are costly to us. The Iraq War is a fine example of that. I believe it is one reason why so many people now are wary of the foreign entanglements Washington warned us about. But many people knew that war was a mistake. The question is why candidates with good judgment don't prevail in elections any more. If the US could elect better leaders, that would save a lot more money and lives than looking for "government waste" in military budgets. But to get better leaders, we have to vote better. That means supporting people with good judgment who know what they are doing. But voters cannot tell who has good judgment without themselves becoming more informed about the world, and without paying attention to their own history.

[ballsofsteel]

Good Morning. Hitler had a real bad flatulence problem so in this instance Trump and Hitler are alike being Trump is full of shit also.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4678840/Adolf-Hitler-had-poor-table-manners-and-suffered-flatulence.html

[*michaelsean*]

(06-02-2017, 11:42 PM)Dill Wrote: Mike, I don't just "hear" about free education and healthcare in other countries. I have lived in some of them and benefited therefrom.

The reason we do not have good affordable healthcare of the sort found in other first world countries is not because we are paying to police the world. 

It is because free education and healthcare raise taxes, and one political party is dead set against raising taxes and offering free education and healthcare.

If you think free education and healthcare are worthy goals, then join the Democratic Party and make your voice heard. If you would rather the money spent on a wall or wish to keep taxes low then you understand your priorities.

Wait until everyone finds out you can't pay for education and healthcare by making the wealthy pay their fair share and see what they say.

[Dill]

(06-05-2017, 09:24 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Wait until everyone finds out you can't pay for education and healthcare by making the wealthy pay their fair share and see what they say.

"Fair share" is a start on reducing costs, Mike. Education and healthcare don't have to be free. It's not free in Germany, but they pay half what we do.

[*wildcats forever*]

(06-05-2017, 10:49 AM)Dill Wrote: "Fair share" is a start on reducing costs, Mike. Education and healthcare don't have to be free. It's not free in Germany, but they pay half what we do.

Indeed, "free" is a lofty goal at best, given the current political climate. If only we could just see any proactive movement toward addressing the financial impact these two issues have on the 'average' citizen, not to mention those nearing dire straits. 

[*michaelsean*]

(06-05-2017, 10:49 AM)Dill Wrote: "Fair share" is a start on reducing costs, Mike. Education and healthcare don't have to be free. It's not free in Germany, but they pay half what we do.

I don't have a problem with a lot of tuitions here.  (Room and board is a different story.)  My daughter's tuition is about $11,000 at Ohio State, and that doesn't seem insane.  I'm also used to paying for Catholic High School which may be a reason it doesn't seem crazy to me.  

[GMDino]

(06-05-2017, 11:13 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't have a problem with a lot of tuitions here.  (Room and board is a different story.)  My daughter's tuition is about $11,000 at Ohio State, and that doesn't seem insane.  I'm also used to paying for Catholic High School which may be a reason it doesn't seem crazy to me.  

Our local Catholic high school (that I graduated from 30 years ago) costs nearly as much for a semester as the local community college.  It's insane.

[Arturo Bandini]

(06-05-2017, 10:49 AM)Dill Wrote: "Fair share" is a start on reducing costs, Mike. Education and healthcare don't have to be free. It's not free in Germany, but they pay half what we do.

You mean that you have to pay to put your kids at school ??

Well, I'm surprised.

Is this for all the schools or just college ? 

[*michaelsean*]

(06-05-2017, 11:19 AM)GMDino Wrote: Our local Catholic high school (that I graduated from 30 years ago) costs nearly as much for a semester as the local community college.  It's insane.

Yes it is.  My daughter was just under $10,000 when she graduated.  $11,500 for my son.  If I lived in a better school district he's probably be going there.