Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Environment Environmental Politics Forum - Environmental issues, global warming, pollution, and proposals


Thanks Tree143Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 4th, 2017, 07:26 PM   #71
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by justoneman View Post
Sorry but we should not put a penny in the Green Climate fund so that other countries can have the money. I do not want to pay for one solar panel in another country at all.
Please read the short article, and then give another try at a post that is a response to it. Thanks.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 07:27 PM   #72
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
Why should we give any money to that fund? What are the goals/desired results?
Your asking both of those questions means you have some homework to do.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:30 PM   #73
Celebrating diversity
 
Sabcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 21,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Your asking both of those questions means you have some homework to do.
So you cannot answer the questions? that's ok. Nobody can. But we are just supposed to accept your emotional arguments because of feelings and stuff.
Sabcat is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:43 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Earth
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
So you cannot answer the questions? that's ok. Nobody can. But we are just supposed to accept your emotional arguments because of feelings and stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjmWv82HHQs
Salinator1 is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:49 PM   #75
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
So you cannot answer the questions? that's ok. Nobody can. But we are just supposed to accept your emotional arguments because of feelings and stuff.
My emotional arguments or yours? I'll take mine, and you'll take yours.

Please don't play the pitiful "cannot answer questions" game seeing as it's your primary MO when you're called on your bullshit. Now, to your questions:
Why should we give any money to that fund? What are the goals/desired results?
Now look at that for a moment. You're all against US' fiscal participation in the fund. You've made that plain. However, you don't know what the fund's goals/desired results are.

You formed an opinion without understanding what the goals/desired results of the fund are.
Thanks from Clara007
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 10:45 PM   #76
Celebrating diversity
 
Sabcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 21,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
My emotional arguments or yours? I'll take mine, and you'll take yours.

Please don't play the pitiful "cannot answer questions" game seeing as it's your primary MO when you're called on your bullshit. Now, to your questions:
Why should we give any money to that fund? What are the goals/desired results?
Now look at that for a moment. You're all against US' fiscal participation in the fund. You've made that plain. However, you don't know what the fund's goals/desired results are.

You formed an opinion without understanding what the goals/desired results of the fund are.


It appears to be my MO because progressives never seem to back up their arguments.

Maybe if you could explain why the US giving away a shit ton of money would be benifitial you could make your point.

You could give it a shot and answer the questions or you could continue to deflect.

It is your position. You are saying that the US is making a mistake by pulling out of the agreement. I am saying that they are not because I see no reason that we should give billions of dollars to other nations. You say we should. So why?

Last edited by Sabcat; June 4th, 2017 at 10:48 PM.
Sabcat is offline  
Old June 5th, 2017, 04:14 AM   #77
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by username View Post
I just have one question. Can anyone tell me what was in the Paris climate agreement that actually mandated any regulations for the environment?

The Paris Agreement, with its emphasis on consensus-building, allows for voluntary and nationally determined targets--and no legally binding mandates, unlike the Kyoto Protocol. Each nation brings commitment targets to the table and reports back in five years. All parties agree to a peer and technical review. The point is more of a 'name and shame'--rather than a legal 'gotcha'. I would call it more of a competition.
So, to answer your question, NO. The Paris Accord does not actually mandate any regulations for the environment, which is ONE of the reasons Nicaragua declined to sign. In 2015, Nicaraguan envoy Paul Oquist criticized the Paris Agreement for not punishing countries who didn't follow it. He stated Nicaragua will continue countering climate change on its own, with plans being that the country will be "90 percent renewable" by 2020.

Article 13 states: "In order to build mutual trust and confidence and to promote effective implementation, an enhanced transparency framework for action and support, with built-in flexibility which takes into account parties' different capacities and builds upon collective experience, is hereby established."

Mutual trust. Hmmm.....now there's a concept.
Thanks from iolo and right to left
Clara007 is offline  
Old June 5th, 2017, 04:58 AM   #78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Lehigh Valley Pa.,USA
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Arguably, the US is playing other nations for the fool on a per capita, that is the cost to each citizen, basis.


If the United States contributed its full pledge, the total would be a little less than $10 per American. With Mr. Trump stopping payments, the United States will have contributed $1 billion, or just more than $3 per person.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...fund.html?_r=0

I hope that $3 doesn't break your bank Jimbo.

Where are the other potentially major green house gas emitters ?? Like China, India and Russia??....What Sweden Luxembourg and Norway produce does not mean squat....and if their people want to pay into the fund that is their business..
Jimgorn is offline  
Old June 5th, 2017, 08:14 AM   #79
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
It appears to be my MO because progressives never seem to back up their arguments.

Maybe if you could explain why the US giving away a shit ton of money would be benifitial you could make your point.

You could give it a shot and answer the questions or you could continue to deflect.

It is your position. You are saying that the US is making a mistake by pulling out of the agreement. I am saying that they are not because I see no reason that we should give billions of dollars to other nations. You say we should. So why?
First off, the US contribution had been pegged at $3 billion. IF you had read the article, you would have seen that the projects are wide ranging such as improving vital water supplies in areas seeing impacts from changes in climate.

I don't expect you or others like you filled with fears and greed which are fed by your king to ever understand the principle that a rising tide lifts all boats. You don't see it in our country and your don't see it in the world, but that's the principle driving the Paris accords.

But you won't accept that either. You said, correctly, that Russia, China, and India aren't contributing to the development fund, and you ask why should we contribute to it?

Here's the reason: Because we are a much better nation that any of those three. We are, or have been, a world leader, and often the first nation to offer others a helping hand. But now, under your king, we've been demoted to a selfish nation driven by fear and greed, and millions, tens of millions of people like you approve of this message.

Hopefully, we will survive this....
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 5th, 2017, 08:18 AM   #80
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 54,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
The Paris Agreement, with its emphasis on consensus-building, allows for voluntary and nationally determined targets--and no legally binding mandates, unlike the Kyoto Protocol. Each nation brings commitment targets to the table and reports back in five years. All parties agree to a peer and technical review. The point is more of a 'name and shame'--rather than a legal 'gotcha'. I would call it more of a competition.
So, to answer your question, NO. The Paris Accord does not actually mandate any regulations for the environment, which is ONE of the reasons Nicaragua declined to sign. In 2015, Nicaraguan envoy Paul Oquist criticized the Paris Agreement for not punishing countries who didn't follow it. He stated Nicaragua will continue countering climate change on its own, with plans being that the country will be "90 percent renewable" by 2020.

Article 13 states: "In order to build mutual trust and confidence and to promote effective implementation, an enhanced transparency framework for action and support, with built-in flexibility which takes into account parties' different capacities and builds upon collective experience, is hereby established."

Mutual trust. Hmmm.....now there's a concept.
Thank you Clara. You educate yourself before replying. No mandates are involved in the Paris accords, something those driven by fear and greed seem to have missed or to ignore.
Thanks from Clara007
imaginethat is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Tags
agreement, announces, climate, expects, paris, trump, withdrawal, withdraws



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trump to scrap Nasa climate research in crackdown on ‘politicized science’ RNG Environment 250 November 28th, 2016 03:59 PM
China warns Trump against abandoning climate change deal excalibur Current Events 247 November 25th, 2016 07:23 AM
What is wrong with this headline? U.S., China ratify Paris climate agreement johnwk Current Events 53 September 5th, 2016 08:03 PM
Harding withdraws from consideration as TSA chief CNN Current Events 1 March 27th, 2010 07:08 AM
Harriet Miers withdraws RidinHighSpeeds Political Talk 17 November 7th, 2005 04:43 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.