We need to talk about Donald – the Nightmare continues

[JimC]

If it prospers, none dare call it treason...

[Tero]

Trump: Paris agreement not fair to US! We need to generate CO2 day and night! We might run out of Bud Light while watching Netflix! Then we would immediately send two parties to two gas stations and compare prices on 12-packs by phone, then buy the cheaper and race home.

[Animavore]

Paranoia and conspiracy theories abound in his Paris speech.

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/t ... ouncement/

Fucking moron.

[Tero]

It's just like his myth about unfair trade deals. No basis.

[Jason]

Paranoia and conspiracy theories abound in his Paris speech.

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/t ... ouncement/

Fucking moron.

I know this isn't a good thing for North America, economically speaking, but I can't help but laugh at all the butt-hurt fallout from so called professionals at this announcement.

[Jason]

Terence Corcoran: Trump calls out the global-control agenda of the Paris deal, but Canada remains oblivious

Canada embraced the Paris agreement in 2015, committing to a new carbon-emissions target of 30-per-cent below 2005 by 2030. The targets will not be met under current policies. Should Canada now join the United States by withdrawing from Paris — as it did from Kyoto — with a view to renegotiating a new global climate protocol?

Nobody in Canada will want to entertain such drastic action today. It would mean facing the wrath of the environmental organizations that now dominate the agenda-setting media reportage on climate issues. But it is clear that Trump has pulled the economic plug on an international climate agreement that has been a shambles from Day One and now has no basis for continued existence.


In his speech, Trump clearly and articulately spelled out the flaws of the Paris agreement — flaws that apply to Canada as well as the United States. Paris puts the U.S. at a disadvantage to its major trading nations. It requires a redistribution of wealth from the U.S. and Canada to other nations.

While Canada and the U.S. are required to reduce their reliance on coal and other fossil fuels, other nations — China, India and African countries — will be allowed to dramatically increase their use of fossil fuels. The expansion of coal use is already underway. China’s coal-fired capacity is forecast to jump 19 per cent over the next five years while Canada tries to eliminate coal to meet climate targets. Pakistan and South Africa are planning major coal-fired projects. India sits on vast coal reserves that it won’t likely leave in the ground.

The idea that the wealthy nations should curb their fossil-fuel-based growth while developing nations expand theirs is an idea embedded in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The theory has been that since developed nations are “principally responsible” for current levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, it is incumbent on them to bear a “heavier burden” as developing nations pursue fossil-fuel-based growth.

Even if one accepts the UN science on climate change, the economic fundamentals behind the Kyoto and Paris protocols are flawed, unfair, damaging and — as has been shown since all this started back in Rio in 1992 — politically unworkable on any international scale.
http://business.financialpost.com/fp-co ... -oblivious

The Financial Post seems to agree with Trump.

[Animavore]

So fucking what?

[Animavore]

A more reasonable article.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/o ... ook.com%2F

[JimC]

The Financial Post represents a minority of monied interests with a clear interest in maintaining their power and wealth. It does not represent the long-term interests of Homo sapiens.

[Jason]

So fucking what?

I thought some people might like to address the points he raises, but I suppose dismissing it and presenting an alternative reality is considered good form in some circles these days.

[Jason]

The Financial Post represents a minority of monied interests with a clear interest in maintaining their power and wealth. It does not represent the long-term interests of Homo sapiens.

That may be so, but you can't just dismiss the claim that the Paris accord did (and still does for Canada) present certain nations with an economic disadvantage in the global economy. Animavore (or the camp he comes from) just wants to dismiss Trump's statements as crazy and nonsensical.

[Animavore]

So fucking what?

I thought some people might like to address the points he raises, but I suppose dismissing it and presenting an alternative reality is considered good form in some circles these days.

Which alternative reality is it you think is being presented here? Is the planet not warming? Is CO2 emissions not the cause? Does putting more energy into a system not lead to more extreme conditions? Is the sea not rising, the ice caps melting, epidemics spreading, coral reefs dying, etc. etc.?

Trump is a fool and nothing else. There's no middle ground to be found with a man who doesn't understand compromise. His term needs to be ended and sanity restored to the USA.

[Animavore]

The Financial Post represents a minority of monied interests with a clear interest in maintaining their power and wealth. It does not represent the long-term interests of Homo sapiens.

That may be so, but you can't just dismiss the claim that the Paris accord did (and still does for Canada) present certain nations with an economic disadvantage in the global economy. Animavore (or the camp he comes from) just wants to dismiss Trump's statements as crazy and nonsensical.

They are. He's a moron.

[Animavore]

Annotated Trump's speech.

http://www.npr.org/2017/06/01/531090243 ... t=20170601

[Brian Peacock]

One of the main economic ideas behind the Paris agreement is that the biggest polluters make the biggest cuts, the trade-off being that the lower polluting developing nations make slower cuts, but as their economies grow they will have to invest more in the renewables which, it was presumed, the big players will be developing to market. The big players will then sell their expertise and technology to the up-and-coming economies, whose growthe will be slowed to some degree by the limits placed on fossil fuel use but, importantly, they will ultimately reap the long-term benefits of avoiding increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 etc - with all that that entails. In the balance the amount of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere decreases over time after a global period of slow-down followed by a period of relative stasis.

That this global solution to a global problem is particularly unfair to the US is a fiction - not only will the adverse effects of rising levels of atmospheric CO2 be felt equally there as anywhere else on the planet, but with a compromised domestic requirement for renewables they'll become a minor player in the global energy market. By reneging on their international commitments the US's 'make me rich now because I won't give a shit when I'm dead' attitude is as much a betrayal of US children and grandchildren as it is an affront to the children and grandchildren of all other nations.