Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 209

Thread: Trump pulls out of Paris

  1. #1

    Default Trump pulls out of Paris

    It must be quite a shock for the Liberal elite / establishment, to see a President who does, what he what he said he was going to do.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-...say-1496343854

    President Donald Trump announced Thursday afternoon that he has decided to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate accord, which he said is “very unfair” to American workers and costing jobs.

    After his initial announcement was interrupted by applause from guests in the White House Rose Garden, Mr. Trump quickly said he would “begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris accord or really an entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the U.S., its businesses, its workers, its people, it’s taxpayers.”

    “So we’re getting out, but we will start to negotiate and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair,” the president said. “And if we can, that’s great.”


    Framing the decision mostly in economic and political terms, the president focused on the benefits for the world’s other leading carbon-emitters, China and India, while stating his concern for protecting the environment and eschewing any reiteration of his past claims that climate change isn’t real.

    “This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the U.S.,” Mr. Trump said.
    Watch what happens - even more private capital into the US now - that's where the financial returns are.

  2. #2

    Default

    Must have been a shocker for Ivanka who supports the Paris accord...


    As does major US corporations including oil companies, and the rest of the World.

    well at least Virginia coal miners are happy...

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 01-06-2017 at 03:20 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  3. #3
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default


  4. #4

    Default

    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  5. #5
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #6

    Default

    Trump just betrayed the world. Now the world will fight back.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.df77902b07b0

    Todd Stern, a visiting lecturer at Yale Law School, was U.S. special envoy for climate change from 2009 to 2016.

    President Trump has made a colossal mistake in deciding to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. There is simply no case for withdrawal, other than a desire to double down on an ill-informed campaign promise, while the case for staying in is overwhelming. But damaging as it is, this decision is not the beginning of the end for efforts to contain climate change. The world decided in Paris to confront the climate threat, and it is not turning back.


    Around the world, climate change is a metastasizing danger, for some countries even an existential threat. It was understood in the years leading up to the Paris negotiation that the climate challenge could be met only with a new kind of agreement premised on concerted effort by all. That agreement — ambitious, universal, transparent, balanced — was reached in Paris, with the help of U.S. leadership every step of the way.

    Trump’s decision will be seen as an ugly betrayal — self-centered, callous, hollow, cruel. The ravages of climate change have been on display in recent years in the superstorms, floods, rising sea levels, droughts, fires and killing heat waves that will only get worse as the carbon index mounts. Vulnerable countries will look at the United States, the richest power on Earth, the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, and think — even if they do not say — how dare you?

    Former president Barack Obama once said to business leaders, in a Roosevelt Room meeting I attended, that climate change was the one threat, other than nuclear weapons, with the potential to alter the course of human progress. A near-consensus of major U.S. companies urged the Trump administration to stay in the agreement because they know climate change is real, that the Paris agreement is a good and balanced deal, that their own concerns on matters such as intellectual property and trade will only be defended if U.S. negotiators are at the table and that turning the United States into a climate-change pariah — will be bad for business, for access to markets and for investment. But our chief executive president decided to leave U.S. business in the lurch.

    But let’s be clear: This is not the end of the line. This is a call to arms.


    Countries won’t follow Trump out of the Paris climate agreement and over a cliff. They won’t give Trump the satisfaction of “canceling” the agreement, as he promised during his campaign. They will want to show that they can carry on without the United States.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post

    Well I don't need to see any further evidence than this to see that that these international non-committal "climate change" agreements are anything more than a mechanism for global wealth redistribution.

  8. #8

    Default

    Instead, the 1 percent of Americans are happy, living in their offshore tax free havens while we choke on coal emissions...

    Meanwhile China is shutting down 100 coal fired power plants.

    China’s Coal Fleet Will Soon Be More Efficient Than America’s
    China continues to close down older coal plants. And the newer ones are some of the most efficient on the planet.
    https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...-than-americas


    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Trump just betrayed the world. Now the world will fight back.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.df77902b07b0

    Todd Stern, a visiting lecturer at Yale Law School, was U.S. special envoy for climate change from 2009 to 2016.

    President Trump has made a colossal mistake in deciding to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. There is simply no case for withdrawal, other than a desire to double down on an ill-informed campaign promise, while the case for staying in is overwhelming. But damaging as it is, this decision is not the beginning of the end for efforts to contain climate change. The world decided in Paris to confront the climate threat, and it is not turning back.


    Around the world, climate change is a metastasizing danger, for some countries even an existential threat. It was understood in the years leading up to the Paris negotiation that the climate challenge could be met only with a new kind of agreement premised on concerted effort by all. That agreement — ambitious, universal, transparent, balanced — was reached in Paris, with the help of U.S. leadership every step of the way.

    Trump’s decision will be seen as an ugly betrayal — self-centered, callous, hollow, cruel. The ravages of climate change have been on display in recent years in the superstorms, floods, rising sea levels, droughts, fires and killing heat waves that will only get worse as the carbon index mounts. Vulnerable countries will look at the United States, the richest power on Earth, the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, and think — even if they do not say — how dare you?

    Former president Barack Obama once said to business leaders, in a Roosevelt Room meeting I attended, that climate change was the one threat, other than nuclear weapons, with the potential to alter the course of human progress. A near-consensus of major U.S. companies urged the Trump administration to stay in the agreement because they know climate change is real, that the Paris agreement is a good and balanced deal, that their own concerns on matters such as intellectual property and trade will only be defended if U.S. negotiators are at the table and that turning the United States into a climate-change pariah — will be bad for business, for access to markets and for investment. But our chief executive president decided to leave U.S. business in the lurch.

    But let’s be clear: This is not the end of the line. This is a call to arms.


    Countries won’t follow Trump out of the Paris climate agreement and over a cliff. They won’t give Trump the satisfaction of “canceling” the agreement, as he promised during his campaign. They will want to show that they can carry on without the United States.
    I agree, I think this will be a tipping point. Over the last year, most western countries have gone from viewing the US as a friend and strong ally, to recently unreliable and I think they have just moved further into another category - obstacle to the common good.

    I think even China realizes the folly here. The Chinese leader just got a warm welcome in Germany earlier this week. The US now will largely be on its own, isolated and its influence will continue to diminish. The rest of the western countries and the world will move on without it. The rest of the world is really not happy with the US now and some point soon there will be a painful reckoning or realization for the US that this matters.

  10. #10
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post

    Well I don't need to see any further evidence than this to see that that these international non-committal "climate change" agreements are anything more than a mechanism for global wealth redistribution.
    This was ALL Obama's doing though

  11. #11

    Default

    Well, we can watch more capital, more jobs, going south now. Why would you invest in Canada, why would you put a manufacturing plant in a City you know is going to face ever increasing electricity and gas costs over time as the carbon taxes ratchet up, when you can invest in the US and not have to worry about that (or for that matter China, or other Paris countries that aren't actually implementing it / don't have carbon taxes)?

  12. #12

    Default

    Principles?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  13. #13

    Default

    Well, <1/5 of the population with >1/5 the US GDP looks to have opted back in...



    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  14. #14

    Default

    Long term vision? Understanding that this is a short-term anomaly? Being in an industry where energy is less than half your inputs and labour costs like health insurance are more important?
    There can only be one.

  15. #15

    Default

    Ottawa, Ontario


    June 1, 2017



    The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement in response to the United States’ decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement:
    “We are deeply disappointed that the United States federal government has decided to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Canada is unwavering in our commitment to fight climate change and support clean economic growth. Canadians know we need to take decisive and collective action to tackle the many harsh realities of our changing climate.
    “While the U.S. decision is disheartening, we remain inspired by the growing momentum around the world to combat climate change and transition to clean growth economies. We are proud that Canada stands united with all the other parties that support the Agreement. We will continue to work with our domestic and international partners to drive progress on one of the greatest challenges we face as a world.
    “This is not only about the huge economic opportunities of clean growth and the need to address the pressing threats of climate change. This is about an ambitious and unshakeable desire to leave a cleaner, healthier and more sustainable planet for our kids and for generations to come.
    “We are all custodians of this world, and that is why Canada will continue to work with the U.S. at the state level, and with other U.S. stakeholders, to address climate change and promote clean growth. We will also continue to reach out to the U.S. federal government to discuss this matter of critical importance for all humankind, and to identify areas of shared interest for collaboration, including on emissions reductions.”

    http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2017/06/01/...withdraw-paris
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Well, we can watch more capital, more jobs, going south now. Why would you invest in Canada, why would you put a manufacturing plant in a City you know is going to face ever increasing electricity and gas costs over time as the carbon taxes ratchet up, when you can invest in the US and not have to worry about that (or for that matter China, or other Paris countries that aren't actually implementing it / don't have carbon taxes)?
    Businesses make decisions on where to build major facilities and make large investments based on the long term not the short term. Yesterday the US was part of that agreement, today it is not. There will be another election in the US in four year - oh sorry, in less than two years - they have them much more often than us. Even if it gives a temporary advantage (which I think is not necessarily the case), a political decision such as that can be easily changed and may not be long lasting.

    Also US states and cities have their own environmental policies and regulations that the US government can not necessarily change and they seem to be moving in the opposite direction from Trump.

    If anything I think one of the reactions of the rest of the world to the US decision will be to put up trade barriers to US goods based on environmental regulations. A business that builds a facility in the US may find they lose access to some foreign markets (especially European ones) because of this. Unfortunately, the US has no trade agreement with Europe it can threaten to tear up. The US has a lot of companies that do business internationally that understand all the ramifications of this, which is why they were opposed to what Trump just did.

  18. #18

    Default

    ^nice theory, but not what's happening, the money is flowing into the US on mass, unemployment is at record lows (about half of most Canadian provinces), and GDP is soaring. If anything the threat of trade barriers is encouraging investment in the US, because its the most wealthy consumer market in the world to be part of.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.
    Actually, I've always prided myself on being an ethical investor. I'll be speaking with my broker when I get back from Sweden to ensure that I'm still comfortable with what's in my portfolio & ensure that it matches my morals & ethics. I don't sell my principles out for an easy buck.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.
    If we have destroyed our environment, those nice pieces of paper with pictures of the Queen on them are not going to save us. We only have one planet to live on unless all your money can buy you a ticket to Mars or something.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^nice theory, but not what's happening, the money is flowing into the US on mass, unemployment is at record lows (about half of most Canadian provinces), and GDP is soaring. If anything the threat of trade barriers is encouraging investment in the US, because its the most wealthy consumer market in the world to be part of.
    You are referring to data from the past to support a decision that has just been made today. I see a flaw in the logic. Lets see what the numbers look like in six months or a year.

    But if you really want to cite those statistics, Canada, Japan Germany and France's economic growth was actually higher in the last quarter than the US. So following your logic their trade barriers must be working better for us than them.

  22. #22

    Default

    French President makes a speech about Trump pulling out of the Paris Accord.

    He invites American scientists and engineers to come and work with them.

    He concludes his eloquent speech, "Make the Planet Great Again"
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  23. #23
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.
    And money won't buy the future of this planet for our species to live on.
    That is the most short sighted and egocentric statement I've see in a while. Impressive in your double down of pure capitalism at all cost rhetoric.
    Honestly, the fact that you vehemently oppose becoming ultimately more efficient, boggles my mind.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Honestly, the fact that you vehemently oppose becoming ultimately more efficient, boggles my mind.
    Where did I say that? I'm totally in favor of more efficient. If you can build in Canada, and have a more efficient production cost than the US, that's great. I don't think that's going to possible for many manufacturers though, given how our electricity and gas is going through the roof in price. It makes more sense to be more efficient there - and that's what we are seeing with business right now. There will be a transition away from fossil fuels, when the technology exists to make it economic. Not when a bunch of politicians or green activities think it can magically happen - companies won't survive long enough to see that future if their costs of production are twice what their competitors are in the US. Our Canadian unemployment rates relative to the US reflects that reality.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-06-2017 at 05:21 PM.

  25. #25

    Default

    8 hours ago it was 16C here in Edmonton. Now that Trump pulled the USA from the Paris accord, it is 24C. If you do the math, by this time tomorrow it will be a sweltering 48C!!!

  26. #26

    Default

    Heard on the radio this afternoon that since China - the world's largest polluter by far - is considered a "developing country" (by the Paris Accord definition), they will be allowed to increase emissions until 2030 while receiving money from "developed" countries.

    I am all for less pollution and preserving the environment, but these international agreements are a joke.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    French President makes a speech about Trump pulling out of the Paris Accord.

    He invites American scientists and engineers to come and work with them.

    He concludes his eloquent speech, "Make the Planet Great Again"
    Funny how France dropped their plans for a carbon tax... the only difference between France and the US, is that US tells the truth, whereas France and China and other countries "say" they are doing something, but don't. Canada is one of the only "boy-scout" countries stupid enough to be sabotaging their economy / sending industry elsewhere, by taxing this natural substance (carbon - which is the basis of all life, and carbon dioxide, which is the food of plants / trees).
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-06-2017 at 05:25 PM.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    8 hours ago it was 16C here in Edmonton. Now that Trump pulled the USA from the Paris accord, it is 24C. If you do the math, by this time tomorrow it will be a sweltering 48C!!!
    We are all simply amazed by your knowledge of science and math.

    Who knew?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  29. #29
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    French President makes a speech about Trump pulling out of the Paris Accord.

    He invites American scientists and engineers to come and work with them.

    He concludes his eloquent speech, "Make the Planet Great Again"
    Funny how France dropped their plans for a carbon tax... the only difference between France and the US, is that US tells the truth, whereas France and China and other countries "say" they are doing something, but don't. Canada is one of the only "boy-scout" countries stupid enough to be sabotaging their economy / sending industry elsewhere, by taxing this natural substance (carbon - which is the basis of all life, and carbon dioxide, which is the food of plants / trees).


    Elon Musk, Mr 5 billion subsidies is upset.OMG will he make it on his own? Yes, Canada will be the only one, to some we will look awesome, but they dont have to live here..

  30. #30
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Heard on the radio this afternoon that since China - the world's largest polluter by far - is considered a "developing country" (by the Paris Accord definition), they will be allowed to increase emissions until 2030 while receiving money from "developed" countries.

    I am all for less pollution and preserving the environment, but these international agreements are a joke.
    This is what I dont understand..that is just ridiculous.

  31. #31

    Default

    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    There can only be one.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Honestly, the fact that you vehemently oppose becoming ultimately more efficient, boggles my mind.
    Where did I say that? I'm totally in favor of more efficient. If you can build in Canada, and have a more efficient production cost than the US, that's great. I don't think that's going to possible for many manufacturers though, given how our electricity and gas is going through the roof in price. It makes more sense to be more efficient there - and that's what we are seeing with business right now. There will be a transition away from fossil fuels, when the technology exists to make it economic. Not when a bunch of politicians or green activities think it can magically happen - companies won't survive long enough to see that future if their costs of production are twice what their competitors are in the US. Our Canadian unemployment rates relative to the US reflects that reality.
    It's not hard to cherry pick costs to support an argument it is more expensive in one place than the other. For instance, US auto makers have long said the high cost of US health care was a big problem for them. In Canada, that was not a problem. Some costs are higher in Canada, but some others are higher in the US and that should not be ignored either.

    Also, electricity costs vary a lot across Canada. Ontario seems to have higher costs now, in part because of expensive nuclear plant refurbishments. In many other provinces, including Alberta, electricity is much cheaper. Anyways, as manufacturing becomes more efficient, I think it will be less energy intensive so I don't think energy costs will be as big of a concern in the future as it might have been 20 or 30 years ago.

    The difference between the Canadian and US unemployment rates has generally existed for many years and isn't something recent. I think it has more to do with how the unemployed are counted in the US vs. Canada. I understand there are a number of people who are not working in the US are not counted as unemployed, whereas under the Canadian method they would be.

  33. #33

    Default

    Trump wanted to renegotiate the Paris Accord. The other countries said, NO!

    So much for Trump's negotiating skills.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  34. #34

    Default

    Economic sanctions should be made against the USA for pulling out.

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Trump wanted to renegotiate the Paris Accord. The other countries said, NO!

    So much for Trump's negotiating skills.
    He apparently wanted to negotiate a free trade agreement with Germany too, asked Merkel 10 times and she said NO too. Apparently nothing personal, but Trump missed the little detail that Germany is part of the EU so it does not negotiate international trade agreements. Merkel explained to him that all such negotiation goes through the EU. Who knew? Oh right, Canada just did it that way.

    At least we can't say Trump didn't learn something new on his trip abroad, but he might have made a better impression if he was more up on this beforehand.

  36. #36
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    Plus France dropped their carbon tax, why?

  37. #37
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    If its bad for the US he said he would drop it, he kept a promise.

  38. #38

    Default

    What he says and what are the facts, are a point of debate. How many scientists and economists did he discuss this with before his decision?

    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, and even Canada's efforts were a fraction of what would be required to meet the target (a $200 carbon tax, not a $20 one). Even the truck load of regulations Obama bought in were doing squat. The world consumes more oil today than it ever has, and that consumption is increasing. Production has never been higher, and reserves are exceptional thanks to new technologies that open up every field ever drilled for a new round of extraction. Paris is a total failure, pretending it means something, and suggesting Trump withdrawing from Paris will have an impact (other than saving the US billions in wasted subsidies to other countries), is nonsense.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-06-2017 at 06:33 PM.

  40. #40
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    Plus France dropped their carbon tax, why?
    True but misleading. France - like all countries in the EU - already taxes fossil fuels much more heavily than Alberta does even with a carbon tax.

    That's why gasoline prices in France are about double those in Alberta.

    https://www.numbeo.com/gas-prices/co...ayCurrency=CAD

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Trump wanted to renegotiate the Paris Accord. The other countries said, NO!

    So much for Trump's negotiating skills.
    He apparently wanted to negotiate a free trade agreement with Germany too, asked Merkel 10 times and she said NO too. Apparently nothing personal, but Trump missed the little detail that Germany is part of the EU so it does not negotiate international trade agreements. Merkel explained to him that all such negotiation goes through the EU. Who knew? Oh right, Canada just did it that way.

    At least we can't say Trump didn't learn something new on his trip abroad, but he might have made a better impression if he was more up on this beforehand.
    And not just once. Merkel had to tell him 11 times.


    "Ten times Trump asked [German chancellor Angela Merkel] if he could negotiate a trade deal with Germany. Every time she replied, 'You can’t do a trade deal with Germany, only the EU,'" the official said.


    They continued: "On the eleventh refusal, Trump finally got the message, 'Oh, we’ll do a deal with Europe then.'"


    Merkel reportedly told her cabinet members that Trump had "very basic misunderstandings" on the "fundamentals" of the EU and trade.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...many-eu-2017-4

  42. #42
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Does this mean that more tarsand oil will be accepted into the USA bolstering the economy of our region where we actually live and make our paychecks. I feel happy for the poorest states that mine coal and would have been devastated, maybe an agreement can be made where these areas would be top of the list for green jobs before they take their economy away. Maybe trump was thinking of that and these people. A new agreement with the promise of jobs to replace theirs plus more in these areas, and maybe Alberta's too.

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Does this mean that more tarsand oil will be accepted into the USA bolstering the economy of our region where we actually live and make our paychecks. I feel happy for the poorest states that mine coal and would have been devastated, maybe an agreement can be made where these areas would be top of the list for green jobs before they take their economy away. Maybe trump was thinking of that and these people. A new agreement with the promise of jobs to replace theirs plus more in these areas, and maybe Alberta's too.
    I doubt that Trump thinks much about Alberta's welfare. His interests seem to be just the US and maybe after that places that have a Trump Hotel or golf course. No Trump Hotel in Alberta. I think we might be right after Albania in his mental filing system.

  44. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Economic sanctions should be made against the USA for pulling out.
    Does that include trips to Vegas?

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, .
    Just where do you get your information?

    There are only three countries that did not sign the Accord. Syria, Nicaragua and Trumpland.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  46. #46
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Honestly, the fact that you vehemently oppose becoming ultimately more efficient, boggles my mind.
    Where did I say that? I'm totally in favor of more efficient. If you can build in Canada, and have a more efficient production cost than the US, that's great. I don't think that's going to possible for many manufacturers though, given how our electricity and gas is going through the roof in price. It makes more sense to be more efficient there - and that's what we are seeing with business right now. There will be a transition away from fossil fuels, when the technology exists to make it economic. Not when a bunch of politicians or green activities think it can magically happen - companies won't survive long enough to see that future if their costs of production are twice what their competitors are in the US. Our Canadian unemployment rates relative to the US reflects that reality.
    Reducing greenhouse is ultimately about being more efficient. That's what these policies do, they force innovation.
    The US can be a laggard for dieing industries that are heavy polluters.
    Except it this protectionist move impacts the world beyond their boarders so I have to actually care about this regressive policy pandering.

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Economic sanctions should be made against the USA for pulling out.
    Does that include trips to Vegas?
    Well maybe Nevada will disavow Trump's action, like California and New York are doing and move ahead with state initiatives to be more environmental. After all, Tesla had a big battery factory in Nevada. They are benefiting from green jobs.

  48. #48
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Does this mean that more tarsand oil will be accepted into the USA bolstering the economy of our region where we actually live and make our paychecks. I feel happy for the poorest states that mine coal and would have been devastated, maybe an agreement can be made where these areas would be top of the list for green jobs before they take their economy away. Maybe trump was thinking of that and these people. A new agreement with the promise of jobs to replace theirs plus more in these areas, and maybe Alberta's too.
    I doubt that Trump thinks much about Alberta's welfare. His interests seem to be just the US and maybe after that places that have a Trump Hotel or golf course. No Trump Hotel in Alberta. I think we might be right after Albania in his mental filing system.
    I wasn't implying that trump was thinking of Alberta I only meant that we are also perveyers of evil substances as well as Kentucky , Wyoming , Texas , Oklahoma, sask, and even California and Alaska so we're all in the same leaky boat in a sense when it comes to survival without selling carbon.

  49. #49
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, and even Canada's efforts were a fraction of what would be required to meet the target (a $200 carbon tax, not a $20 one). Even the truck load of regulations Obama bought in were doing squat. The world consumes more oil today than it ever has, and that consumption is increasing. Production has never been higher, and reserves are exceptional thanks to new technologies that open up every field ever drilled for a new round of extraction. Paris is a total failure, pretending it means something, and suggesting Trump withdrawing from Paris will have an impact (other than saving the US billions in wasted subsidies to other countries), is nonsense.
    Yep, it's the way it is so we should do nothing about it. The world doesn't change policies of the past should not be updated. Status quo forever.
    "Paris is a total failure" yet it's not even 18 months old...what you meant to say is Trump just did everything he could to bring to failure.
    You arguments are just total garbage.

  50. #50
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    Plus France dropped their carbon tax, why?
    True but misleading. France - like all countries in the EU - already taxes fossil fuels much more heavily than Alberta does even with a carbon tax.

    That's why gasoline prices in France are about double those in Alberta.

    https://www.numbeo.com/gas-prices/co...ayCurrency=CAD
    The UK has always had high fuel prices, i know, I lived there. The UK is unbelievable.

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Does this mean that more tarsand oil will be accepted into the USA bolstering the economy of our region where we actually live and make our paychecks. I feel happy for the poorest states that mine coal and would have been devastated, maybe an agreement can be made where these areas would be top of the list for green jobs before they take their economy away. Maybe trump was thinking of that and these people. A new agreement with the promise of jobs to replace theirs plus more in these areas, and maybe Alberta's too.
    I doubt that Trump thinks much about Alberta's welfare. His interests seem to be just the US and maybe after that places that have a Trump Hotel or golf course. No Trump Hotel in Alberta. I think we might be right after Albania in his mental filing system.
    I wasn't implying that trump was thinking of Alberta I only meant that we are also perveyers of evil substances as well as Kentucky , Wyoming , Texas , Oklahoma, sask, and even California and Alaska so we're all in the same leaky boat in a sense when it comes to survival without selling carbon.
    Well its hard to understand exactly what is going through any US President's mind at the best of times. I find Trump doesn't try to make his thought process clear to people and I suspect it might be somewhat jumbled. From what he has said in the past, I think biggest concern here is coal miners. Some states with a lot of coal production are poor without a lot of other good job options and they have strongly supported Trump and the Republicans. Therefore, I think there is a combination of genuine concern and political calculation here by Trump.

    Interestingly a number of big US oil companies have publicly said they wanted him to stick with the Paris agreement. I think there are some important differences between the oil and coal industries. First, coal is dirtier. Second, it is an older technology and is sort of on the way out anyways, coal fired power plants are being replaced by cheaper alternatives already. Third and somewhat related, the oil industry can adapt to more stringent environmental standards. I think at this point the people who lead the oil industry realize it would be better for their industry to change than fight.

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them.
    China's emissions are higher than the USA and Europe COMBINED. And China doesn't need to do anything but receive billions of dollars for nothing.

    This Paris climate agreement is a complete farce. If it was presented at face value without the word "Climate" in it's title, the left would not support it either.
    Last edited by MrOilers; 01-06-2017 at 08:29 PM.

  53. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Well maybe Nevada will disavow Trump's action, like California and New York are doing and move ahead with state initiatives to be more environmental. After all, Tesla had a big battery factory in Nevada. They are benefiting from green jobs.
    Ironically, I think that the USA pulling out of the Paris agreement will keep wealth, investment, and research into renewable energy in the USA, decreasing the USA's reliance on fossil fuels sooner.

  54. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them.
    China's emissions are higher than the USA and Europe COMBINED. And China doesn't need to do anything but receive billions of dollars for nothing.

    This Paris climate agreement is a complete farce. If it was presented at face value without the word "Climate" in it's title, the left would not support it either.

    China has reduced it's carbon emissions in each of the past four years. Not reduced the rate. Reduced the emissions.

    Also, Population of USA (321 million) + Europe (Not just EU -m 743 million) - total - 1.064 billion
    Population of China - 1.371 billion

  55. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.
    I think environmentalists, instead of shaming and trying to convince everyone to go along with sketchy plans made by untrustworthy politicians, they should instead set examples for all of us to follow.

    They should all start their own zero-carbon emission businesses. Power your operations with windmills and solar panels, use geothermal heating, and drive electric delivery vehicles. You can also pay all your employees a minimum of $15 per hour to show how easy it is to give everyone a "living wage". Build competitive businesses this way and prove that it can be done!

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them.
    China's emissions are higher than the USA and Europe COMBINED. And China doesn't need to do anything but receive billions of dollars for nothing.

    This Paris climate agreement is a complete farce. If it was presented at face value without the word "Climate" in it's title, the left would not support it either.

    China has reduced it's carbon emissions in each of the past four years. Not reduced the rate. Reduced the emissions.
    I don't believe that.

    I do believe that the USA and Europe have reduced theirs slightly, though.

  57. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post

    Well I don't need to see any further evidence than this to see that that these international non-committal "climate change" agreements are anything more than a mechanism for global wealth redistribution.
    "Well I don't need to see any further evidence than this to see that that these international non-committal "climate change" agreements are anything more than a mechanism for global wealth redistribution. " Well, I think you forgot the quotation marks. This sounds like another Spicer'ism (Remember this one: "That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period." Sean Spicer [or is it Scene Splicer?])


    The following chart presents the Dow Jones Industrial Average's daily percent change frequency distribution from 1896 to the present.





    Point of Interest - Most striking is that this chart approaches a normal distribution (Bell Curve) thereby suggesting that the daily changes in the Dow are random. The Dow Weekly Percent Change Histogram has similar characteristics. For those of you that actually remember that statistics course we have a few numbers. The mean (average daily gain) is .026% demonstrating the upward bias of the Dow. The standard deviation is 1.07% and translated to English this means that 68% of the time the Dow has a daily change between ±1.1%; 95% of the time the Dow has a daily change between ±2.1%; and 99% of the time the Dow has a daily change between ±3.2%. So if you see that the Dow has dropped well over 2% you shouldn't be to surprised as as it would be expected that the Dow fluctuate more than ±2.1% five percent of the time which equals one trading day out of the month. All this hopefully provides you with a little perspective as to the Dow's daily fluctuations."


    http://dogsofthedow.com/histogram-m.htm

    Bolding was mine
    Last edited by KC; 01-06-2017 at 08:58 PM.

  58. #58

    Default

    More reason to pull investment out of Alberta oilsands and buy American . ' social license ' lmao. More like scam artists

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Principles?
    Principals won't pay for your food in retirement, but the money you made as opposed to lost, on your investments, will.
    I think environmentalists, instead of shaming and trying to convince everyone to go along with sketchy plans made by untrustworthy politicians, they should instead set examples for all of us to follow.

    They should all start their own zero-carbon emission businesses. Power your operations with windmills and solar panels, use geothermal heating, and drive electric delivery vehicles. You can also pay all your employees a minimum of $15 per hour to show how easy it is to give everyone a "living wage". Build competitive businesses this way and prove that it can be done!
    I bet many have. Hence today's super cheap solar panels, etc.

  60. #60
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them.
    China's emissions are higher than the USA and Europe COMBINED. And China doesn't need to do anything but receive billions of dollars for nothing.

    This Paris climate agreement is a complete farce. If it was presented at face value without the word "Climate" in it's title, the left would not support it either.

    China has reduced it's carbon emissions in each of the past four years. Not reduced the rate. Reduced the emissions.

    Also, Population of USA (321 million) + Europe (Not just EU -m 743 million) - total - 1.064 billion
    Population of China - 1.371 billion
    Is that why they all walk around wearing masks?

  61. #61
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    Plus France dropped their carbon tax, why?
    True but misleading. France - like all countries in the EU - already taxes fossil fuels much more heavily than Alberta does even with a carbon tax.

    That's why gasoline prices in France are about double those in Alberta.

    https://www.numbeo.com/gas-prices/co...ayCurrency=CAD
    Btw, the reason their fuel is so very high, is they need the money to pay for their social programs. Bus drivers ( over 15 years ago) were retiring at a very young age, with a full pension.

  62. #62
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by champking View Post
    More reason to pull investment out of Alberta oilsands and buy American . ' social license ' lmao. More like scam artists
    I think it was a case of buy high and sell low for a number of international oil companies. They came in when oil prices were high and sold after they dropped.

    If oil prices continue to increase, the Alberta companies that have bought up things from them have will have made a great investment. I think it will also ultimately be better for Alberta that the oil sands be developed by Alberta based companies rather than companies that have their head offices in Houston or London, so I don't see this as a bad thing.

    All the problems with pipelines may ultimately lead to more refining being done in Alberta too, rather than Louisiana or China so that may be good for jobs here too. Apparently the Green Leader in BC is friends with the guy who wants to build a refinery in Prince Rupert if you can believe it. The world is such a complicated place.

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I Know, China's emissions are way to high, they should not be allowed to increase them. And to be logically consistent and not just deflecting selfish arse-holes I'm sure that you're fully behind cutting Canada's per capita emissions down to china's level immediately. It's only a 50% cut, we can do it!!!
    Plus France dropped their carbon tax, why?
    True but misleading. France - like all countries in the EU - already taxes fossil fuels much more heavily than Alberta does even with a carbon tax.

    That's why gasoline prices in France are about double those in Alberta.

    https://www.numbeo.com/gas-prices/co...ayCurrency=CAD
    Btw, the reason their fuel is so very high, is they need the money to pay for their social programs. Bus drivers ( over 15 years ago) were retiring at a very young age, with a full pension.
    Perhaps this helps us keep things in perspective here. For all the complaining about the carbon tax, our gas prices here are still fairly good compared to most of Canada and Europe too.

    Europe doesn't have a lot of its own oil, so I think they want to constrain consumption partly out of concerns around security of supply.

  65. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by champking View Post
    More reason to pull investment out of Alberta oilsands and buy American . ' social license ' lmao. More like scam artists
    I think it was a case of buy high and sell low for a number of international oil companies. They came in when oil prices were high and sold after they dropped.

    If oil prices continue to increase, the Alberta companies that have bought up things from them have will have made a great investment. I think it will also ultimately be better for Alberta that the oil sands be developed by Alberta based companies rather than companies that have their head offices in Houston or London, so I don't see this as a bad thing.

    All the problems with pipelines may ultimately lead to more refining being done in Alberta too, rather than Louisiana or China so that may be good for jobs here too. Apparently the Green Leader in BC is friends with the guy who wants to build a refinery in Prince Rupert if you can believe it. The world is such a complicated place.
    Who knows for sure but it was sure a sad day to see Shell go. They were best of the best when it comes to treating it's workers good, it's culture of safety...they really made a guy feel bigger than just a number.

    I know a lot of guys after 25 years in the industry , don't want to go back. We rather a steady paycheck , even at less pay.

    If they thought it was hard to find skilled labor before , many of us have moved on ...we despise the industry we worked for.

    Them lobbying a carbon tax was last straw. Personally I rather take my money and invest in Trump.
    Last edited by champking; 01-06-2017 at 09:50 PM.

  66. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Europe doesn't have a lot of its own oil, so I think they want to constrain consumption partly out of concerns around security of supply.
    Not just security of supply, but security, period. Part of the reason for the wars in Syria - and the refugee crisis - are battles over the real estate needed to build pipelines across Syria to supply oil to Europe. Saudi Arabia (US ally) and Iran (Russian ally) each want to build their own pipeline there, but would rather fund armies to duke it out there instead of compete in the marketplace.

  67. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57

  68. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    .
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    Much of the rhetoric has calm since oil prices collapse but, when everyone thought oil was going $200 we had nothing good to say about our friends to the south, everyone complain they were ripping us off. Albertan's are extremely arrogant but this is what it's about. Selling our friends out in the south to get in bed with the communists. Harper set precedence selling Nexen...we see it with our housing. It's going be the largest land confiscation and all to the communists. I saved all the old articles, what was said and pen Trump. I thinking we making a huge mistake and will do everything in my power to stop it....we're sellouts . Back stabbing sellouts .

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by champking View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    .
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    Much of the rhetoric has calm since oil prices collapse but, when everyone thought oil was going $200 we had nothing good to say about our friends to the south, everyone complain they were ripping us off. Albertan's are extremely arrogant but this is what it's about. Selling our friends out in the south to get in bed with the communists. Harper set precedence selling Nexen...we see it with our housing. It's going be the largest land confiscation and all to the communists. I saved all the old articles, what was said and pen Trump. I thinking we making a huge mistake and will do everything in my power to stop it....we're sellouts . Back stabbing sellouts .
    Provide some quotes and references please.

  70. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    Canada sure jumped on the news.

    Per google:
    "S&P/TSX Composite Index
    OSPTX (INDEXTSI)
    15,469.91Price increase120.00 (0.78%)
    Jun 1, 4:20 PM EDT - Disclaimer..."

    Check Bloomberg and many global markets were up. Gee how could that be?
    Last edited by KC; 01-06-2017 at 10:36 PM.

  71. #71
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    No, I won't see post #57! Why? Because I made a remark on the Dow.lol

  72. #72

  73. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    No, I won't see post #57! Why? Because I made a remark on the Dow.lol
    No, I was just telling you something. lol

  74. #74

    Default

    So why would Trump want to renegotiate a deal to prevent global warming- when he believes global warming is a farce. Sounds very irrational or disingenuous to me.

  75. #75
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Whoa! that's telling the globalists something!!!
    You mean the lack of movement?

    See post #57
    No, I won't see post #57! Why? Because I made a remark on the Dow.lol
    No, I was just telling you something. lol

    Oh, sorry KC

  76. #76
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    So why would Trump want to renegotiate a deal to prevent global warming- when he believes global warming is a farce. Sounds very irrational or disingenuous to me.
    I guess one that doesn't see the US give billions away with no accountability. How many times have we given money away, and it never reaches the right people. Is that so wrong?

  77. #77

    Default

    You missed KC's point completely.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  78. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, .
    Just where do you get your information?

    There are only three countries that did not sign the Accord. Syria, Nicaragua and Trumpland.
    Doh - read the word "implementing". It is easy to sign onto something, talk the green talk (while you fly around the world in jet fuel burning planes with huge entourages to visit places like Paris to sip Chardonnay with the elites), and actually implementing it. Most of the world is doing exactly what the Liberals did with Kyoto - signed on, and nothing. Even France, you know, the place where Paris is, decided not to go on with a carbon tax. The trade unions there will never allow regulations that destroy their well paid jobs. And, even if you go with a carbon tax, it isn't reducing our emissions one iota, other than to the extent it's sending business investment and jobs to other countries where they will emit just as much plant food if not more.
    Last edited by moahunter; 02-06-2017 at 07:29 AM.

  79. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, and even Canada's efforts were a fraction of what would be required to meet the target (a $200 carbon tax, not a $20 one). Even the truck load of regulations Obama bought in were doing squat. The world consumes more oil today than it ever has, and that consumption is increasing. Production has never been higher, and reserves are exceptional thanks to new technologies that open up every field ever drilled for a new round of extraction. Paris is a total failure, pretending it means something, and suggesting Trump withdrawing from Paris will have an impact (other than saving the US billions in wasted subsidies to other countries), is nonsense.
    Yep, it's the way it is so we should do nothing about it. The world doesn't change policies of the past should not be updated. Status quo forever.
    "Paris is a total failure" yet it's not even 18 months old...what you meant to say is Trump just did everything he could to bring to failure.
    You arguments are just total garbage.
    Well you carry on naively believing like a good little Boy Scout DanC, that counties that signed on to Paris are implementing it - other than a few token green projects to make money for consultant friends, most politicians in most countries are doing squat - if they actually do something to make a difference, they are getting voted out, because regular people care more about their jobs and income than they do about reducing their personal consumption. Global emissions will reduce one day, once the rest of the world has caught up to our lifestyles (which they have a right to), and the technology is economic to compete with fossil fuels. We will see at the next Alberta election who's views proved to be garbage, and who's proved to be in tune with Albertans.
    Last edited by moahunter; 02-06-2017 at 08:03 AM.

  80. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The consequences to the World's climate is the effect.
    None - nobody else aside from Canada and a handful of other countries are implementing it anyway, .
    Just where do you get your information?

    There are only three countries that did not sign the Accord. Syria, Nicaragua and Trumpland.
    Doh - read the word "implementing". It is easy to sign onto something, talk the green talk (while you fly around the world in jet fuel burning planes with huge entourages to visit places like Paris to sip Chardonnay with the elites), and actually implementing it. Most of the world is doing exactly what the Liberals did with Kyoto - signed on, and nothing. Even France, you know, the place where Paris is, decided not to go on with a carbon tax. The trade unions there will never allow regulations that destroy their well paid jobs. And, even if you go with a carbon tax, it isn't reducing our emissions one iota, other than to the extent it's sending business investment and jobs to other countries where they will emit just as much plant food if not more.
    Sign and sit is the historical pattern so pulling out may make no difference other than being honest about it. Nonetheless, if that's the case, then it makes absolutely no sense to talk about renegotiating and getting back into the deal. Totally bone-headed suggestion if (right or wrong) the US now exits because it believes global warming isn't real...

  81. #81

    Default

    ^the renegotiation talk is just to appease soft republicians. Trump has massive support from his base for this, including the blue collar democratic industrial heartland in the US he won the election with - it's symbolic (as the Paris accord was), but it's a powerful symbol that the liberal elites and their hypocritical jetsettng luxury yacht living ways dont hold power in the US anymore. Here is a picture of the guy who signed onto Paris for the US, along with his family, showing how much he really cared about implementing it:



    Americans can choose Presidents who tell them to reduce their consumption while they personally increase theirs, or they can choose a President who lets regular people, many of them working class and struggling in difficult economies, consume as much as they can to improve their lifestyles, just like he does. We have the same choice in Canada, aka the jet and the helicopter to the Aga Khans island, and the huge entourages to international conferences to win a security council seat, while being preached to about carbon taxes. I know which I prefer, but then, unlike many on here, I'm a realist who doesn't get my inspiration and my science knowledge from the sound bites of phony's.
    Last edited by moahunter; 02-06-2017 at 08:41 AM.

  82. #82

    Default

    We are all hypocrites. You drive a gas guzzling car don't you? You waste water, use plastics and eat fruit shipped from halfway around the world, correct?

    You make a good point but your Hero, his entourage and security detail flies each weekend to his luxury resort on Air Force One and leaves a carbon footprint the size of a small country.

    At least the former President paid taxes and encouraged nations to reduce emissions and set up regulations and policies in America to clean up the environment. His actions were positive and set America on a path to reduced dependency on foreign resources and CO2 reduction.

    Trump denies that climate change is real and works in the opposite direction. Your Hero is a fraud and you drink his purple toxic Koolaid. Trump want's to go back to the 1950's and 60's where industry could do what they wanted without environmental regulations.








    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  83. #83

    Default

    ^^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

    Tu quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwiː/; Latin for, "you also") or the appeal to hypocrisy is an informal logical fallacy that intends to discredit the validity of the opponent's logical argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s).
    Tu quoque "argument" follows the pattern:

    1. Person A makes claim X.
    2. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
    3. Therefore X is false.


    An example would be:

    Peter: "Based on the arguments I have presented, it is evident that it is morally wrong to use animals for food or clothing."
    Bill: "But you are wearing a leather jacket and you have a roast beef sandwich in your hand! How can you say that using animals for food and clothing is wrong?"

    It is a fallacy because the moral character or past actions of the opponent are generally irrelevant to the logic of the argument. It is often used as a red herring tactic and is a special case of the ad hominem fallacy, which is a category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of facts about the person presenting or supporting the claim or argument.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  84. #84
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    I think environmentalists, instead of shaming and trying to convince everyone to go along with sketchy plans made by untrustworthy politicians, they should instead set examples for all of us to follow.

    They should all start their own zero-carbon emission businesses. Power your operations with windmills and solar panels, use geothermal heating, and drive electric delivery vehicles. You can also pay all your employees a minimum of $15 per hour to show how easy it is to give everyone a "living wage". Build competitive businesses this way and prove that it can be done!



    Good one Mr. Oil.

    Top_Dawg is always amused with these so called progressives and their sanctimonious drivel about what everybody else should be doing.

  85. #85

    Default

    President Trump mentions Youngstown in U.S. withdrawal from climate pact - See more at: http://www.vindy.com/news/2017/jun/0....28F362J1.dpuf

    When asked to respond, Mayor John A. McNally, a Democrat, said: “His decision to withdraw just put the U.S. with Syria and Nicaragua in opposing the deal – and Nicaragua thinks the agreement is not tough enough. Nothing about the U.S. withdrawal would seem to indicate any form of job creation for the city of Youngstown. The Trump administration has never discussed how the withdrawal would better the lives of Youngstown residents. So while it’s nice to hear our city’s name, there is no substance to the thought of putting us with other cities before Paris.” -

    U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan of Howland, D-13th, tweeted: “Pulling out of this deal doesn’t help Youngstown. It destroys American leadership, wipes out clean-energy jobs, and hurts our environment.” -
    See more at: http://www.vindy.com/news/2017/jun/0....u0QjMB2g.dpuf
    Additionally, the Mayor of Youngstown Ohio stated that although they just received $200,000 from the EPA for environmental cleanup and appreciates the POTUS mentioning his city, he supports the Paris Accord and a cleaner environment that means more jobs for his constituents. He stated that the biggest loss was the steel industry in 1977 when 25,000 jobs were lost and does not see any real hope in the few coal jobs for the region and highly doubts that the steel industry will ever come back to Ohio despite what the President thinks. He reminds the President that back in the 1970's, the air was so bad from the coal and steel industry in Pittsburgh and Youngstown that they had to keep the street lights on 24 hours a day.

    His city is committed to a cleaner environment and revitalizing his city that has seen a resurgence of growth, not seen in nearly 50 years because the city is a cleaner and healthier place to live and do business.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  86. #86

    Default

    He also mentioned Pittsburgh, who also supports Paris & voted 80% for Clinton. (You'd think he'd know this since he was handing out election results maps like Happy Meal toys up until a month ago!)
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  87. #87

    Default

    I am trying to be open-mided about the premise of this Paris agreement, but not one person anywhere has been able to explain how taking money from countries that have environmental regulations and giving it all to countries without any regulations (including China) is supposed to make the world less polluted?

    This agreement was negotiated and signed by politicians who are working in the interest of international relations and economics of their own countries. With the Trillions of dollars possibly changing hands , I am skeptical that ANYONE would be doing this deal out of altruism.

  88. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    I am trying to be open-mided about the premise of this Paris agreement, but not one person anywhere has been able to explain how taking money from countries that have environmental regulations and giving it all to countries without any regulations (including China) is supposed to make the world less polluted?
    Given the narrow scope & singular tone of the media outlets you're receptive to listening to (without crying "fake news! fake news!"), I'm not surprised you've not been able to find anyone actually speaking to what the Paris Agreement entails.

    Maybe turn off Fox News & read the agreement for yourself?

    http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  89. #89

    Default

    Fantasy:
    Trump thinks that you can slap a coat of paint on it and all the jobs will come back to Ohio.

    Reality:




    Can President Trump rescue the Rust Belt?

    http://theweek.com/articles/686314/p...scue-rust-belt

    "A steel mill like we have here, 20 years ago, it would have to be run by 5,000 or 6,000 people," says Ohio State Sen. Sean O'Brien. "Now it's 800 people, because of automation." As technology becomes ever more sophisticated, job losses will grow, not diminish. A 2013 study projected that as many as 47 percent of U.S. jobs could be lost to automation and robots over the next two decades.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 02-06-2017 at 10:06 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  90. #90
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,485

    Default

    ^^^^^Illogical they may be, but appeals to hypocrisy can be extremely effective and that's why they're made. The average person may not know much about the soundness of the arguments for the Paris climate agreement. But it's pretty easy to spot a hypocrite when the former President who signed the agreement is seen living a jet setting lifestyle on luxury yachts while you're shoveling snow off your sidewalks in the American Midwest.

    It's pretty much a given that the less you fail to live up to the ideals you espouse, the more damaging they will be to your public reputation. A bible thumping politician or evangelist who talks endlessly about the sanctity of marriage while carrying on an affair with an aide will be judged much more harshly in the court of public opinion than a liberal politician who makes no similar claims.

  91. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    I am trying to be open-mided about the premise of this Paris agreement, but not one person anywhere has been able to explain how taking money from countries that have environmental regulations and giving it all to countries without any regulations (including China) is supposed to make the world less polluted?

    This agreement was negotiated and signed by politicians who are working in the interest of international relations and economics of their own countries. With the Trillions of dollars possibly changing hands , I am skeptical that ANYONE would be doing this deal out of altruism.
    The money changing hands is voluntary contributions, with the goal of $100B per year in a fund for climate mitigation in poor countries. It's a lot of money, but it's not all on the west - middle income countries have made contributions - and even if it were all coming from the top tier wealthy nations (~1Billion people in Canada/US, Western Europe, Japan, Australia, S Korea and a few others) it would amount to about $3B per year for Canada.

    That money would be to allow the poorest countries to do mitigation work to deal with the negative effects of a problem that was they didn't cause. Essentially we would be paying to deal with a problem that we caused - building sea walls in Bangladesh to deal with dea level rise, solar power plants and desalination plants in places where lower rainfall and more frequent drought make them necessary, water treatment where storm flooding makes drinking water worse, that kind of thing.


    It's not wealth transfer any more than it's wealth transfer when the person at fault or their insurance pays the victim's medical bills after a traffic crash.
    There can only be one.

  92. #92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^^^^^Illogical they may be, but appeals to hypocrisy can be extremely effective and that's why they're made. The average person may not know much about the soundness of the arguments for the Paris climate agreement. But it's pretty easy to spot a hypocrite when the former President who signed the agreement is seen living a jet setting lifestyle on luxury yachts while you're shoveling snow off your sidewalks in the American Midwest.

    *snip*
    .
    Now if only the real environmentalists had promoted carbon taxes as a way to screw over Al Gore for his excessive use......
    There can only be one.

  93. #93

    Default

    Regular people see people like Al Gore and Obama (and current politicians) leave their gigantic homes (that have no solar panels or windmills), take a car to the airport, jump onto their private plane, then take a limo to their mega yacht so they can host a dinner party with other celebrity environmental activists. Then later we hear them shame us for ruining the environment and telling us we need to pay higher taxes for living our "unsustainable" lifestyles, threaten to take away our sources of income (energy jobs), and then put our nation deeper into debt so they can give free money to polluting countries like China in international agreements like this.

    I applaud President Trump for finally having the guts to tell all those champagne socialist hypocrites where to stick it.

  94. #94

    Default

    MrOilers hates planet earth.

  95. #95

    Default

    And logic. And scientific consensus. And fact-based reporting.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  96. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Regular people see people like Al Gore and Obama (and current politicians) leave their gigantic homes (that have no solar panels or windmills), take a car to the airport, jump onto their private plane, then take a limo to their mega yacht so they can host a dinner party with other celebrity environmental activists. Then later we hear them shame us for ruining the environment and telling us we need to pay higher taxes for living our "unsustainable" lifestyles, threaten to take away our sources of income (energy jobs), and then put our nation deeper into debt so they can give free money to polluting countries like China in international agreements like this.

    I applaud President Trump for finally having the guts to tell all those champagne socialist hypocrites where to stick it.
    Then you should be railing against the inequality of the system, pushing for Nordic-style social democracy. Because guess who will feel the effects of climate change? That's right, first the poor especially in poor and arid nations, then the working and lower middle classes who can't afford a yacht. Then, if we do hit worst case scenario we get mass migrations from places rendered uninhabitable, massive social upheaval.

    Hey, maybe we'll even get a violent revolution of some sort! That'll show the elites!!
    There can only be one.

  97. #97
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Regular people see people like Al Gore and Obama (and current politicians) leave their gigantic homes (that have no solar panels or windmills), take a car to the airport, jump onto their private plane, then take a limo to their mega yacht so they can host a dinner party with other celebrity environmental activists. Then later we hear them shame us for ruining the environment and telling us we need to pay higher taxes for living our "unsustainable" lifestyles, threaten to take away our sources of income (energy jobs), and then put our nation deeper into debt so they can give free money to polluting countries like China in international agreements like this.

    I applaud President Trump for finally having the guts to tell all those champagne socialist hypocrites where to stick it.

    I don't know why anyone is surprised either, he said during his campaign, this was what he was going to do. The other countries can carry on, but China and India aren't kicking any money in, so there's that

  98. #98

    Default

    there's more to life than money. That seems to be all trump supporters care about though.

  99. #99

    Default

    Why the hell should India put money in? Their emissions are 1.9t. per capita, ours are 15.5t per capita, 8 times as much. They are also much poorer - and they have their own very poor areas that will likely be hit hard by climate change - their own places to do mitigation and their own work to get their population out of extreme poverty without increasing emissions.
    There can only be one.

  100. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    Why the hell should India put money in? Their emissions are 1.9t. per capita, ours are 15.5t per capita, 8 times as much. They are also much poorer - and they have their own very poor areas that will likely be hit hard by climate change - their own places to do mitigation and their own work to get their population out of extreme poverty without increasing emissions.
    I thought you cared about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. If that's the goal - reducing the emissions of the biggest emitters is what matters - not the "per capita" emissions. Oh - hold on, seems not the goal, its a poverty re-distribution fund, which makes Obama feel better with his enlightened family and friends sipping lattes on the yacht.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •