As stupid as pulling out of this agreement is..........At least he's actually trying to stick to his election pledges!

Aesma wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

Lead the free world with those sanctions man. I'm sure countries all over the world will be lining up to implement them.

Why is everyone in the world so concerned about every little move the USA makes? First we don't matter, then we're everyones first concern. Move along, do the climate agreement among yourselves. We're a big ocean away.

192 countries signed the agreement. Who are you leading, again ?

Not leading, following Russia. People disagreeing with that Boss tent to contract some sort of poisoning, so it is understandable that he is scared and follows his orders.

Best regards
Thomas

seahawk wrote:

Well done Trump, This move was a clear statement: America first, fuck the rest.

And even more clear: I fucking hate my children.

Best regards
Thomas

Aesma wrote:

Being poor in my country is much better than in yours.

How nice! Might it be better to be poor (with some form of relief) but with an actual chance to stop being poor by working your way out of poverty?

I think it might be "better" to be poor in the USA with relatively low unemployment rates than to be poor in a European country that has much higher levels of unemployment.

Pihero wrote:

DfwRevolution :"It is easy to imagine that the Paris Agreement will have the unintended consequence of shifting more and more of the world's manufacturing base away from clean economies (U.S., EU, Japan) and to dirty economies (China, India), thereby making everyone worse off."
The US is one of the worst polluters of all and to call it a *clean* economy is either an uninformed statement or plain bullsµ1t .
In 2015, in terms of CO2 emissions,
United States...5,172,338,000 tons......14.34% world emission.....16.1 tons per capita, nearly twice the Germans, three times the French...
China.............10,641,789,000..............29.51%.............................7.7 tons
India ...............2,454,968,000................6.81%.............................1.9 ton

How many people in the USA have to go around wearing masks against foul air?

What's the situation in China?

Try Googling "Air Pollution in India? Try the article in The Economist.

BobPatterson wrote:

[ but with an actual chance to stop being poor by working your way out of poverty?

Free education. But hey, Trump plans to let the poor die, I guess in the republican mind that counts as a way out...

I think it might be "better" to be poor in the USA with relatively low unemployment rates than to be poor in a European country that has much higher levels of unemployment.

When you have a job... regardless, unemployment rate 3.9% in Germany and 4.7% in the USA.

Best regards
Thomas

I think the plan is more clear now.

USA supposed to bankroll sale of EU RE tech and Chinese RE products to rest of the world. In turn, the USA gets the "leader" certificate and few claps.

Trump just threw a monkey wrench.

BobPatterson wrote:

Aesma wrote:

Being poor in my country is much better than in yours.

How nice! Might it be better to be poor (with some form of relief) but with an actual chance to stop being poor by working your way out of poverty?

I think it might be "better" to be poor in the USA with relatively low unemployment rates than to be poor in a European country that has much higher levels of unemployment.

That's not the reality of being poor in America. The temporarily poor (those just out of school, etc.) can work their way out of it. The chronically poor are so because the idea of just working your way out of it doesn't pan out in reality.

dtw2hyd wrote:

I think the plan is more clear now.

USA supposed to bankroll sale of EU RE tech and Chinese RE products to rest of the world. In turn, the USA gets the "leader" certificate and few claps.

Trump just threw a monkey wrench.

As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion. The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.

Let's just stop lending the US money and see what happens. A matter of fact is, the trade imbalance Trump "worries" about is you getting stuff for free, for nothing else but the promise to pay them one day.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

I think the plan is more clear now.

USA supposed to bankroll sale of EU RE tech and Chinese RE products to rest of the world. In turn, the USA gets the "leader" certificate and few claps.

Trump just threw a monkey wrench.

As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion. The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.

Let's just stop lending the US money and see what happens. A matter of fact is, the trade imbalance Trump "worries" about is you getting stuff for free, for nothing else but the promise to pay them one day.

Best regards
Thomas

Your threats are senseless and out of control Tommy. The USA is out of the climate agreement, that is all. Give it a rest and move on.

Varsity1 wrote:

Give it a rest and move on.

But thank good lots of your states, communities and companies are not as incredible stupid as your current Russian lapdog of a president.

Best regards
Tgimas

tommy1808 wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

Give it a rest and move on.

But thank good lots of your states, communities and companies are not as incredible stupid as your current Russian lapdog of a president.

American lapdogs can be cute. German Führerins are usually not, perhaps they are best called frumpy. I supposing using hässlich for your Führerin would be a bit too strong.

Must we devolve into insulting elected officials?

tommy1808 wrote:

As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion. The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.

Let's just stop lending the US money and see what happens.

Foreign entities are happy to hold U.S. Government securities because they are the safest investments available.

If you stop investing in them I will perhaps be paid more interest on my savings.

BobPatterson wrote:

Must we devolve into insulting elected officials?

As a German I am used to having my Führerin insulted, happens all the time on a.net wothout me getting my panties twisted, and I don't want to call him "the awesome" .... so, options are few.
Insulting Obama was the right wings sport, so I am a bit surprised that it can phase you. I guess only insulting black presidents is ok, got that.
Regardless, Obama was elected without Russia getting him the election, likely colluding with them and so on and so forth, so from where I stand every phrase used on Obama is just peachy with the Russian puppet you call "Mr. President". Btw, did he show his birth certificate? The KGB has always been good with forgered documents after all.
In short: What goes around, comes around. Unless you can quote yourself complaining about that kind of language regarding Obama, I don't really see your point.

Best regards
Thomas

BobPatterson wrote:

Foreign entities are happy to hold U.S. Government securities because they are the safest investments available.

Living in the past I see.
https://www.google.com.tw/amp/www.cnbc. ... yield.html

German bonds are considered so safe by investors that they literally pay us to take their money....

Best regards
Thomas

AAPilot wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Well done Trump, This move was a clear statement: America first, fuck the rest.

Good, thats why we elected him.

We got sick of Barrys bowing and apology tour.

That was not meant in a negative way. The US president should care only about the USA. Trump is doing this beautifully.

I see this topic like many other long threads has got down to name calling instead of sensible discussion and so perhaps should be closeed

BobPatterson wrote:

Aesma wrote:

Being poor in my country is much better than in yours.

How nice! Might it be better to be poor (with some form of relief) but with an actual chance to stop being poor by working your way out of poverty?

I think it might be "better" to be poor in the USA with relatively low unemployment rates than to be poor in a European country that has much higher levels of unemployment.

Many people in both our countries stay at minimum wage all their lives.

In mine they get free healthcare and a retirement.

They also get free education should they wish to improve their lives, and their kids will have free education too.

seahawk wrote:

Well done Trump, This move was a clear statement: America first, fuck the rest.

Covfefe !

I like Trump, it makes America more normal. Not having had a total nutjob as leader since 1776 was a record few countries could compete with.

tommy1808 wrote:

...

As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion. The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters....
Best regards
Thomas

Exactly, we own most of our debt. Whatever other countries are lending they are taking back as trade or defense spending by the US.

If we stop borrowing from other countries and stop spending on others wars, we will do just fine.

Forget about being the leader in renewable energy, maybe we will be able to manufacture our own toasters.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Forget about being the leader in renewable energy, maybe we will be able to manufacture our own toasters.

Of course you can make your own toasters, easy, only that largely the same people that complain about the unfair trade balance areally the ones not willing to pay for a toaster made in the US. Even US Maschine building is happening to a large part in China. Good that Trump just gabe your rich a trillion US $ to invest in China and Vietnam.

Best regards
Thomas

dtw2hyd wrote:

If we stop borrowing from other countries and stop spending on others wars, we will do just fine.

Every war the US has been involved in since WW2 has been 100% owned and for the purposes of "merica", with the possible exception of the Kosovo action which was not really a war anyway.

And good luck with stopping borrowing when we are giving away $1,000,000,000 to our richest 1%, that money has to come from somewhere.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Forget about being the leader in renewable energy, maybe we will be able to manufacture our own toasters.

How is burning coal going to help us make appliances competitively?.

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

I think the plan is more clear now.

USA supposed to bankroll sale of EU RE tech and Chinese RE products to rest of the world. In turn, the USA gets the "leader" certificate and few claps.

Trump just threw a monkey wrench.

As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion. The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.

Let's just stop lending the US money and see what happens. A matter of fact is, the trade imbalance Trump "worries" about is you getting stuff for free, for nothing else but the promise to pay them one day.

Best regards
Thomas

Uppdated numbers for 2017:

http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

The decision is one point, but the way to communicate it is a joke. Not answering direct questions and just imply enjoying how much you have stirred up the world... And after calling global warming an invention of the Chinese to bring America down, the Paris accords are trying the same, only masterminded by the Europeans. This total lack of diplomacy is a disgrace for the role of the American president.

I find it interesting that the lack of the USA in the Paris agreement is the end of the world per the Europeans. Yet they refuse to negotiate the USA's reentry.

Must not be that important.

Varsity1 wrote:

I find it interesting that the lack of the USA in the Paris agreement is the end of the world per the Europeans. Yet they refuse to negotiate the USA's reentry.

Must not be that important.

Agreed. It was very telling that many of the European leaders immediately stated that there would be NO renegotiation of the treaty. If it's as important as many people want us to believe, then wouldn't you be willing to work hard (including renegotiating) to make sure the US is involved? And if it's NOT that important to have the US involved... then why all the wailing and cursing?

Varsity1 wrote:

I find it interesting that the lack of the USA in the Paris agreement is the end of the world per the Europeans. Yet they refuse to negotiate the USA's reentry.

Must not be that important.

They also forgot how many countries threatened to walk out multiple times if their demands were not met to reach this historic agreement.

@Tommy
We are not the best in environmental protection, but we are not the worst either. Every utility company in America working hard in investing RE. Even if Trump wants to double coal production, not going to happen. The system will take care of itself.

Sure Trump will sign few EOs to give heartburn to few folks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... e28d478bde

I find it interesting that Obama's climate change envoy pleads with Trump to have stayed in yet admits countries can downgrade their emission targets (last paragraph).

So that brings up two interesting things:

-Did Trump not know this, or did and wanted to say screw it, anyway?
-Why are liberals so up in arms about him leaving when based on this paper agreement, this Paris accord was a joke?

jreuschl wrote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-trump-stay-in-the-paris-agreement-youll-regret-it-if-you-dont/2017/05/08/c2cc9f78-337d-11e7-b412-62beef8121f7_story.html?utm_term=.eee28d478bde

I find it interesting that Obama's climate change envoy pleads with Trump to have stayed in yet admits countries can downgrade their emission targets (last paragraph).

So that brings up two interesting things:

-Did Trump not know this, or did and wanted to say screw it, anyway?
-Why are liberals so up in arms about him leaving when based on this paper agreement, this Paris accord was a joke?

You can downgrade your emissions targets until they mean nothing (like china did). But developed countries (the USA) cannot walk away from the Billions it is expected to mail 'poor' countries every year.

It's simply a waste of money.

The USA nearly got hoodwinked. This is why the senate needs to ratify treaties.

DfwRevolution wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

yes the planet belongs to all of us and i was replying to DfwRevolution.

The planet - and the people on it - will be fine without the Paris Agreement. Probably better.

link?

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

The law is the law, once you sign an agreement you need to follow through.

It's not a law.

a binding agreement backed by intentional law.

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

IMO he's creating reasons for the world to hate America

Haters gonna hate.

only when given good reason

Dutchy wrote:

And America is now in the wonderful list of countries not backing this agreement. You know, Nicaragua, Syria and the United States of America. Well done President Trump, well done. America is almost first, now they became 3rd #sad

And this is actually misleading because:
1. Nicaragua thinks it should go further (so in essence, this agreement isn't good enough for them). However, unlike the US, it has an ambitious goal of being powered by renewable energy, with the intended goal of being 90% renewable by 2020.
2. Syria is in the middle of a civil war so naturally its delegation cannot agree to abide by any target so far.

And in case anyone decides to throw in the Holy See, technically speaking it can't join because it's not a UN member and regardless of whether it joins or not, as it's surrounded by Italy (and therefore the EU), it will de facto apply the regulations on its own (even with its tiny carbon footprint).

That leaves the US in the unique position of whining about "me me me" instead of "how can we help?".

I'd be very interested in seeing how countries turn to China and Russia for assistance and pivot away from the US. America First indeed. The so-called Apology Tour (the non-existent tour that apparently lowered the standing of the US in the world, despite evidence to the contrary) will seem like all but a memory after this.

I wouldn't be surprised if the G7 is reduced to G6 with the US suspended due to divergent goals of the nations, and whether countries find ways to retaliate (like slapping a carbon tax or moving operations from the US to more environmentally friendly countries).

I absolutely LOVE that he is getting America out. The agreement never made any sense in the first place. Several reasons that all weave in together:

1) First of all, I don't dispute that climate change is happening and very real, just to get that out of the way.

2) I do think we should get rid of carbon fuels as soon as possible, but not because they are pollutants but because they are technologically medieval and finite. So the sooner we can get off of them, the better.

3) Having said that, the amount of human influence on the process is absolutely very much in the dark. You obviously find those numbers that 97% of scientists say it's mostly man made and all that crap, but when you dig a little deeper you find that this isn't at all true. What is true is that the models the pro-human impact scientists are putting out do not work. They have been revising those models year after year because they absolutely failed to prove what they were supposed to prove. Then they are changed so they retroactively explain what happened, but with those changes made they again fail to predict what happens in the next year or two, let alone decades.

4) Now it's getting hypothetical. Even if, and that's a big if, humans have a significant impact on the climate, the Paris deal is the absolute wrong way to tackle it. Let's look at the starkest of contrasts in it:

- The United States is supposed to cut emissions by 28% AND give away billions of dollars to other countries, prominent among them rich China(!)
- China, on the other hand, can even expand emissions until the US has reached the above goal AND gets a lot of money. Now where is that a fair deal? It's an absolute bullshit deal that no American should have signed even at gunpoint, yet Obama rushed to the front and signed voluntarily. How dumb can it get? It is simply a deal that redistributes from America to China, when China is poised to overtake America anyway in the coming years. Dumb, dumber Paris Agreement.

Anyway, getting back to the point of human influence or not. Even if we are at fault, it is a gross misappropriation of assets to try and fight the cause. It is fighting against windmills. Even more so since it's not even clear that it's not a natural occurrence considering how the models that are supposed to predict the impacts are all rubbish.

Instead, we should put our assets to work trying to mitigate the unavoidable results of climate change. We can always spend the money on dams, flood control and other very expensive things without having this idiotic, ideologically overcharged discussion about human influence on our climate. Just grab a shovel and get to work. That might actually help someone down the line, all this talk sure won't.

The Paris Agreement was a colossal waste of time and money, and it's a good thing that it's now a thing of the past.

On a sidenote, I absolutely know the kind of comments I will get on this again. 97% of scientists this, how can you be so anti-science that. All from people who, at the same time, want to convince me that there are 52 (or where are we already) genders and a lot of other unscientific bullshit. Get real, people.

Varsity1 wrote:

I find it interesting that the lack of the USA in the Paris agreement is the end of the world per the Europeans. Yet they refuse to negotiate the USA's reentry.

Must not be that important.

Becuase it took 25 years to get all the 195 coutries to agree to this agreement. They are not prepared to spend another 25 years

And the fact that the US that are just 5% of the world population are the second worst polluter in the world....

And now the foreign minister still says that the US wants to reduce its emissions, while the president wants to create jobs in the coal industry. I mean seriously??

socalgeo wrote:

ER757 wrote:

The cost of this decision is beginning to show - Europe and China have already begun forming new alliances that exclude the USA
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/eu ... 4a13432f7b

This will end up affecting trade between the US and other counties eventually and if those of you who are fine with the USA being an outlier and an isolationist don't think this will negatively affect the US economy, you're in for a rude awakening.

Perfect,

China can stop selling us their crap and we'll bring those jobs back to the US. They don't buy shit from us anyway. WIN!
Germany can stop selling us their cars and we'll bring those jobs back to the US. They don't buy shit from us anyway. WIN!
France and Germany can start using Chinese stuff in their airplanes. Good luck with that. LOL
The Arabs can cut off our oil - Oh yeah - we have more oil than them... LOL
Ze Germans can deal with Russia on Ukraine without our help.... LOL
Spain, well, Spain doesn't buy much from us anyway...
Japan and Korea? They arent going to mess with US since we are their defense against China, Russia, and North Korea... LOL
Australia can go ahead and figure out how to deal with Indonesia without us - NOT

the list goes on and on and on...

In 6 months this will be a faint memory

Where do I start with this.

- Build your own stuff and see how the average citizen like the cost of it compared to what they pay now.
- China and Germany buy I-phones, use social media that was created by Americans, buy Boeing jets for both civilian and material use. They also buy American cars as well, Ford and GM are very popular cars throughout Europe, a majority of computers use Windows and MS's enterprise systems. People buy a lot from America and if you isolate yourself your economy will suffer substantially.
- The big German and Japanese auto companies all manufacture their cars in the US creating US jobs.
- Airplane manufactures will adapt to not being able to buy US parts and Boeing jets have Euro parts so this goes vice versa. Most Landing gear systems are actually designed and built in Canada as an example
- Please god stop buying oil from the middle east then so the awful Saudi Royal family is not backed by the US. Most Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East.
- Japan, Korea, and Australia will look elsewhere for protection outside of the US. This will consist of what we are seeing now Europe cutting deals with China and even building an alliance with Japan, South Korea and Australia. Don't get me wrong the US's leadership in the world especially when dealing with North Korea and Russia is preferred but your president is not playing nice with these allies. They will adapt to the changed United States.

StarAC17 wrote:

Most Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East.

All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East

Mortyman wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

I find it interesting that the lack of the USA in the Paris agreement is the end of the world per the Europeans. Yet they refuse to negotiate the USA's reentry.

Must not be that important.

Becuase it took 25 years to get all the 195 coutries to agree to this agreement. They are not prepared to spend another 25 years

190+ countries "signed" the agreement.

145+ countries "ratified" it.

0 countries need to abide by strict rules for reaching reasonable goals to limit climate change.

It is not a treaty with teeth in it. It is a feel-good, tree-hugger, mainly European attempt at power grabbing.

salttee wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

Most Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East.

All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East

Except for the Islamic terror in China, right??

DIRECTFLT wrote:

salttee wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

Most Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East.

All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East

Except for the Islamic terror in China, right??

You've got a valid but very minor point, and I doubt that you understand the subject that you just raised..

China's problems with some Muslims stem from the fact that they are meddling in the Tarim basin. In fact they are immigrating overwhelming numbers of ethnic Chinese into cities and towns that have been populated by Uyghurs for thousands of years. They are doing about the same thing to the Uyghurs that the Israeli's have done and are doing to the original residents of the Levant; except China has enough people to completely dwarf the Uyghurs wheras the Israeli's are in danger of becoming a minority in the land they have stolen.

So I guess I have to modify my statement to: All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East and China meddles in central Asia.

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

salttee wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

salttee wrote:

All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East

Except for the Islamic terror in China, right??

You've got a valid but very minor point, and I doubt that you understand the subject that you just raised..

China's problems with some Muslims stem from the fact that they are meddling in the Tarim basin. In fact they are immigrating overwhelming numbers of ethnic Chinese into cities and towns that have been populated by Uyghurs for thousands of years. They are doing about the same thing to the Uyghurs that the Israeli's have done and are doing to the original residents of the Levant; except China has enough people to completely dwarf the Uyghurs wheras the Israeli's are in danger of becoming a minority in the land they have stolen.

So I guess I have to modify my statement to: All Islamic terrorism roots from the fact that the west meddles with the Middle East and China meddles in central Asia.

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

So 'meddling' in a region is justification for you to blow yourself up in a children's concert? Grow a pair and hold these animals accountable.

Maybe you don't understand quite what activity "meddling" constitutes. The Israeli's drove millions of people out of their homes, neighborhoods and country. They took a peaceful population and turned them into refugees. China is doing a similar deed in Tarim.

On the other hand, when the Nazi's "meddled" in Poland we, the US, firebombed several German cities among other things, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden , I could go on and on with this subject but you should get the idea. If someone invaded your little patch in Texas or wherever and drove you and your family down into the Sonora desert without even a change of clothes, what would you do?

Islamic terrorism has been occurring since Mohammad himself took breaks from raping his 9 year old wife to murder and pillage his way into an empire, which his successors extended all the way into parts of Europe until they were finally expelled - it has absolutely nothing to do with "western meddling" or lack thereof in the Middle East.

Pyrex wrote:

Islamic terrorism has been occurring since Mohammad himself took breaks from raping his 9 year old wife to murder and pillage his way into an empire, which his successors extended all the way into parts of Europe until they were finally expelled - it has absolutely nothing to do with "western meddling" or lack thereof in the Middle East.

Have you ever looked into the comparative history of Islam vs the west? You really should do that before pontificating on subjects you clearly know nothing about.

salttee wrote:

Pyrex wrote:

Islamic terrorism has been occurring since Mohammad himself took breaks from raping his 9 year old wife to murder and pillage his way into an empire, which his successors extended all the way into parts of Europe until they were finally expelled - it has absolutely nothing to do with "western meddling" or lack thereof in the Middle East.

Have you ever looked into the comparative history of Islam vs the west? You really should do that before pontificating on subjects you clearly know nothing about.

You advocate all this 'research' and learning yet it seems to be you who lives in a revisionist history. You haven't cited a single incidence or event.

Actually, I have cited several instances in my last few posts, and I've even left citations for a couple of them.

dtw2hyd wrote:

@Tommy
We are not the best in environmental protection, but we are not the worst either. Every utility company in America working hard in investing RE. Even if Trump wants to double coal production, not going to happen

I never said you are. You are however one of the very few moving backwards. I think I did mention somewhere up threat that much of America is wiser than the toddler you've put in charge. Heck, even almost half of the Trump voters are smarter.

The system will take care of itself.

The invisible hand only works well with the right insentive. Short and long term economic success may not yield same ones.

Best regards
Thomas

dtw2hyd wrote:

Every utility company in America working hard in investing RE.

This is something I don't understand. Energy companies and utilities are indeed striving to do R&D and incentivize the adoption of renewable energy. Why are states making it difficult for residents to adopt those programs? Oklahoma, for example, passed a law where if you have solar/win power providing energy, if you consume more than than what the generators provide, you're charged for the whole amount (not just the portion over the generator's); if you consume less than the generator, you get nothing (you get charged a fee for providing energy to the grid). Heads, I win; tails, you lose.

dtw2hyd wrote:

The system will take care of itself.

If the system indeed takes care of itself, coal mines would be shutting down at a faster rate, yet coal is still on a lifeline under the promise of expanding it. If the system takes care of itself, hybrid fuels would already be dominating the market, with cars becoming more fuel efficient and/or adopting this fuel, yet the thought of Joe Average's pickup truck being configured to reach 30mpg makes Joe angry because of freedom.

No...the system will take care of itself when government at all levels steps back. It's one thing to incentivize new technology (in the end, it benefits everyone); it's another to hinder its adoption.

bob patterson :; "How many people in the USA have to go around wearing masks against foul air?
What's the situation in China?
Try Googling "Air Pollution in India? Try the article in The Economist."


You are so much in denial that India and China are your points of comparison ?
Question : Can you get lower ?
Answer : hang onto donald's leadership a wee while longer.