You are only allowed to post in this thread if your country participates in Paris climate agreement

You are only allowed to post in this thread if your country participates in Paris climate agreement

Other urls found in this thread:

americanbanker.com/opinion/banks-key-to-determining-success-of-paris-climate-deal
www4.unfccc.int/Submissions/Lists/OSPSubmissionUpload/261_295_131233554162587561-Roadmap to the US$100bn (UNFCCC).pdf
nytimes.com/cwire/2009/12/17/17climatewire-hillary-clinton-pledges-100b-for-developing-96794.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

How does it feel to lead the free world now that burgers dropped germoney

global warming is just a conspiracy by china to artificially stunt the economy

*posts in the thread anyway*

Big news to you, China IS the world's economy

>Giving money to this useless jew pact

I would be lmaoing if I was American but I'm not so I'm angry at my cucky country for falling for this shit

feels bad man
we are not nearly as strong as USA and now we have to do their job because they elected a orange clown

Why are Am*ricans so evil?

*buys pollution licenses from corrupt politicians*

Waito piggu go homu!

You can always leaf and move to the USA

>crippling your own domestic industry to delay the inevitable by a couple of years
I seriously hope you guys don't do this

My cities mayor agrees with the Paris Climate Agreement

In fact, you can post here. You're country is still in the agreement.

"The Paris Agreement's Article 28 says any nation wanting to pull out has to wait three years from the date the agreement gained legal force, which was Nov. 4, 2016, before seeking to leave. It then has to wait another year."

>Destroying God's green earth for some temporary profits.

ISHYGDDT

>burden sharing
>differentiation

Islamig Gommunism.

>Developed countries MUST provide financial resources to help developing countries

How can anyone be okay with this? Yeah lets just give our money to fucking useless niggers instead of using it for our own benefit, great idea! Thank George Soros!

...

>How can anyone be okay with this? Yeah lets just give our money to fucking useless niggers instead of using it for our own benefit, great idea! Thank George Soros!

Because you polluted the world while getting rich, that's why.

climate change is still happening whether or not you decide to hogtie yourself and funnel hundreds of millions to the third world, stop virtue signalling.

I'm not virtue signaling retard.

>burden-sharing
Instantly fucking dropped.

You do realize Tump is doing this because he refuses to let go those oil sherkels? I doesn't matter anyway since in the next decade hibrid and electric cars will be the standard in the rest of the world while you guys keep with fosil fuelle power

>declaring to be the virtuous side in an argument without actually fucking doing anything
yes you are, the whole agreement is

fuck off and drop dead socialist szwabe


Im glad USA is causing great ass pain to yurotrash bastards.

If rich countries are the ones that polluted the world why do we need to give money to poor countries?

oh no, money

>How can anyone be okay with this?

Because those with the right connections are going to make mad bank off the billions sent to Third World countries

>The Paris Agreement, the global climate change accord crafted by 196 nations at a United Nations conference in December, and formally signed Friday, has huge and mostly positive implications for banks.

>The agreement is widely expected to be the catalyst for large-scale lending and investments in greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction technologies and infrastructure. The International Energy Agency has estimated that the investment required to meet the Paris Agreement goals could be a towering $1 trillion annually. Bank of America Merrill Lynch calculates that investments in renewable energy alone will need to grow to $900 billion by 2030.

americanbanker.com/opinion/banks-key-to-determining-success-of-paris-climate-deal

It's basically free money for the elites, while progressive liberals get to pat themselves on the back for "doing something about climate change"

You mean nuclear power you dumb spic.

We're bringing it back, bitch.
based polan

We shouldn't have stopped at two.

just like in my fallout games! :D

America never really left, they just delayed it by 4 years after which they'll be back with their tails between their legs. Except this time it will be harder and more expensive for them to fix their shit because they've let the weeds take root.

On the plus side, we now have irrefutable evidence that anyone who has ever set foot on american soil is 100% retarded.

Humanity can no ibfluence global climate on this stage of development. All processes we observe are of natural origin.

where's your argument though

>we now have irrefutable evidence that anyone who has ever set foot on american soil is 100% retarded.

>climate change agreement with no enforcement mechanisms, aka "Just set the bar low enough to get free gibs from gullible Westerners"
>Americans are the idiots for wanting out of this

So I happen to know that you're all pretty inbred and isolated in NZ but surely your sheep wife must've informed you that the whole world backs this agreement and not just "gullible" westerners?

yeah but what's your argument

hey bby

Sweden is a cuck for the "brother good" syndrome even tho it makes zero difference on the end figure in environment related end table.

Miljöpartiet get out REEEEEEE

The rest of the world backs it for the free gibs. That was his point.

dis gud post

hi

>the whole world backs this agreement

No shit sherlock, because everyone wins
Gullible Westerners get to feel good for "doing something", Third Worlders get free gibs for half-assed milestones, and well-connected elites from both groups get to make money out of the lucrative investment/graft opportunities presented in Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to see major corporations backing this shit and come to the conclusion that "Even they can see sense on climate change!", instead of "What's their angle?"

>wanting us to give $100 billion to China
lol no, do it yourself if you're so inclined.

we're still targeting emissions and clean energy tech. we're just not dumping money on China's lap. they have a surplus, they can use it

>dumbfuck president in place
>meanwhile half the country in revolt against his climate policies and buying electric/going renewable

trump is slowly accelerating the partition of america into two pieces. dumb hickshit flyovers mining coal, and smart, renewable, high-tech coastal states.

The agreement is much more complex than just throwing money to china and developing nations, you know

And Trump is the champion of the people, fighting against corporate greed?

>Trying to reason with a dumbmerican.

Recuerda que los mexicanos que posteamos aquí si fuimos a la universidad y sabemos dos idiomas, algunos hasta tres, no pierdas tu tiempo.

No it really isn't. It even explains so in infographic fashion in the OP.

This agreement, while notable for finally getting China to acknowledge that there is indeed a climate problem (our government struggled endlessly to get them to the table from 2008-2015), is absolutely shit because it's nonbinding and plays with kiddie gloves for developing countries.

The pact should be binding, it should have non-negotiable goals and targets, and it should be backed by military force for those who break it (UN, NATO, doesn't matter who). That would be the opposite of this dickless wealth transfer from the US and EU to smoggy profligates.

because Mexicans are renowned for being geniuses

>smart, renewable, high-tech coastal states
>smart
Lmao

Great comeback, "reee but he's rich".

吸我的鸡巴,你白左

desu I wish I weren't allowed to post in this thread.

The UNFCCC is just more of the same old third-world communism/national socialism. It cannot, and ought not, ever achieve its goals. It is against the respective national interests of the most prosperous countries to collaborate in these schemes, so they will not voluntarily follow them (at least, not in any serious way). Moreover, the most prosperous countries are the most powerful and influential, so the schemes cannot be foisted upon them or enforced by external power.

International agreements in general must conform to the balance of international power if they are to be really effective. With respect to climate in particular, this means that the prosperous and powerful countries must be freed of burdens while the poor and weak countries must be burdened more heavily. Unless and until a climate policy agreement is created which conforms to the balance of international power, we should expect no solution to climate problems.

I think it's more of a competing interests kind of affair (Trump being supported by oil interests while Hillary was supported by banking interests), but at the end of the day no-one wants to address the elephant in the room that perpetual economic growth is unsustainable.

I mean you're from fucking Germany, surely you of all people should be aware of the absurdity of bewailing Germany's "demographic winter without immigration" while simultaneously demanding that consumption be cut

[builds coal power plant in your thread]

>US pledges 400 million, or about 5 times less than Canada
>Most of the money coming from development banks in developing worlds, in the form of loans

you are a fucking moron who understands ZERO about international economics mate. get the fuck out with your deluded trump talking points.

www4.unfccc.int/Submissions/Lists/OSPSubmissionUpload/261_295_131233554162587561-Roadmap to the US$100bn (UNFCCC).pdf

binding agreements are nearly impossible to reach with literally every country in the world though.

it'd be nice to have, but impossible to negotiate imo.

*pays lip service to a non binding agreement while continuing to rape the middle class of western nations*

>Trump being supported by oil interests while Hillary was supported by banking interests
Dnd why would you trust somebody supported by oil industries when it comes to climate change?
Oil industry has a very real interest in not curbing down CO2 emission

>international monitoring and tracking
>all the countries that benefit are third world and too poor and not technical enough to create solar/renewable alternatives

>again this is only like 1/5th of the deal, other parts include developing green tech/research for first world use

just shut the fuck up.

>he discovered this topic yesterday
I don't have time for you.

nytimes.com/cwire/2009/12/17/17climatewire-hillary-clinton-pledges-100b-for-developing-96794.html

>COPENHAGEN -- Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has promised the United States will help raise $100 billion annually by 2020 to assist poor countries in coping with climate change as long as America's demands for a global warming pledge are met.

we need to tax all first-world business owners, CEO's, people that earn more than 75k a year a minimum 40% of their income to balance out the world economy. the fact that white americans get to eat cheeseburgers 10 times a week while everybody in africa has to survive on less than $1.50 a day is honestly disgusting.

did you know if we took the money from the 100 richest people in the world, we could end poverty overnight?

>it'd be nice to have, but impossible to negotiate imo.
That is why military force is the last round of any failed negotiation.

lol and why would any country sign a binding countract that threatens them military violence?

a voulentary agreement is the best that is possible on the current political climate, and the first step of a long road of international cooperation

>yes goy, cripple your economy because the global temperature has risen by 0,8°C over the last 130 years.

too obvious

>again this is only like 1/5th of the deal, other parts include developing green tech/research for first world use
Oh boy, it's the old "first world countries sink billions of dollars in R&D for Chinese to get it free"

sounds great

>Accord with no enforcement of greenhouse gas reduction goals
>nationally determined goals
>already being criticized that it's modest goals won't meet it's 2 degree global temperature increase limit
It's going to be another meme agreement that half the countries don't live up to.

That was a good show.

>international monitoring and tracking

...that only covers the "milestones" that developing nations THEMSELVES institute

>developing nation sets the bar so low on climate change goals that it's pretty impossible not to meet them
>developing nation unsurprisingly meets said climate change goals because the bar is set hilariously low
>"Congratulations, [developing nation]! You've done your bit to fight climate change! Here's x billion dollars to help you meet further goals"

fucking welfare to corporations and """""nobility"""""
everyone should leave this shit, we'd reduce pollution and CO2 emissions by not letting this send industry from regulated Europe to reckless 3rd world.

>3 degree increase happens anyway
Well at least we increased the stock value for some "green" companies :^)

See:
A UNFCCC agreement might even get through with that sort of content (okay, not likely) - and it still wouldn't matter. You can't enforce it. The only way you'll ever be able to enforce it is if you're China and the Yellow Chinese get to eat pork buns ten times a week while everybody in America has to survive on less than 10 yuan a day - in which case we should expect to read a post from Mbongo Kwakazulu complaining, on behalf of America, about how disgusting it is that the Chinese are rich and strong.

the state should be able to enforce the necessary taxation. maybe not in the US but luckily we australians have no weapons so theres no chance of civil war.

hello boys

You know the efforts are far from enough, right? It's just a way for politicians to make it look like they are doing something.

this is the first step in a long road of global cooperation against climate change

you sound like a literal drone

Literally just did a spit take.

you do realize this is mainstream opinion outside of your Sup Forums safe space?

Why this is summer is so rainy?

you do realize nobody on here gives a shit what your irl friends think and are capable of constructing their own opinions?

row row fight the powah mutha fucka

That image proved his point dummy.

that would be a reasonable argument if the executives of major oil companies didnt have shares and major stock investments in this renewable energy scam and werent simaltaneously pushing it.

Why would we though? It's not good for Australia. Why would the Australian government do that? It would make them poorer in the long run and it makes the party responsible unelectable for the foreseeable future. The state has no interest in stupid communist agreements that benefit the third-world at the expense of the first.

Anyway, keeping foreigners poor is a good thing for us. Why do you want to ruin yourself and everyone you know for a bunch of stupid African subhumans? You're just going to encourage them to breed, which will put them right back in poverty, and then what?