YN Home  
Home Causes Boards Debate Tools Join YN!
Search YN:
 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
Picture of sudha
Registered: March 29, 2003
Posts: 2615
Posted   Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
do u ppl think that america not signing the protocol is fair? i mean had someone like saddam done this u wud have never let him away with such a crime..dont u think its criminal on part of america to not not sign the protocol as it is the country which emits the most percentage of these harmful gases?
had some other country not done this then u ppl wud go impose sanctions on that country!!!!


Dont let ur studies interfere with ur education!!!!!
Picture of NuShoesAgain
Registered: October 22, 2002
Posts: 1068
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
Exactly.

I volunteer for an environmental org. We're one of the few who actually do try to get our facts right, rather than generate alarmist garbage and follow a mindless dogma. I see how the environmental "industry" works, and, yes, it is an industry! Scare and terror tactics sell. Very well I might add. It's so hard to stay on the up and up in this business. We must double- and triple-check every piece of work because so many studies and claims are junk science at best and unsubstantiated hype at worst.


Liberals prefer equality - all people should be equally poor, unsafe and badly-educated.
Picture of DrStrangelove
Registered: March 13, 2002
Posts: 3477
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
first came up the U.S. said that they would do nothing because Africa didn't have to sign it and that was not fair. This was obviously a very childish notion but made a very good excuse for the States.


Oh, that's right. So the US signs the treaty, and any industry that creates CO2 emissions (read: All of them) has to increase thier operating costs by billions of dollars.

Alternatively they could just move thier manufactuing faclities over to Africa (or any third world country that didn't have to sign.) and build a NEW factory for mere millions.

Kyoto, as it is now, will only drive companies out of the developed countries, the cost of which is prohibitive.

quote:
They will never put risk upon their great money making machine, and therfore petty things like the environment do not matter.


You do realize that the environment is tied to the "money making machine" and many in the corporations know this? There is still hope, and it doesn't involve flawed treaties with cons that outweigh the pros.


"Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?"
Picture of Ipperwash
Registered: December 03, 2004
Posts: 87
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
The United States is a capitalist country, and because of this their most important aspect to protect is not the environment, but their money. When the Kyoto accord was signed by mny countries great strides were made in the next steps into taking a more careful look at the implications of our actions on the environment. I remeber when the discussion of the Kyoto accord first came up the U.S. said that they would do nothing because Africa didn't have to sign it and that was not fair. This was obviously a very childish notion but made a very good excuse for the States. They will never put risk upon their great money making machine, and therfore petty things like the environment do not matter.
And for those who will say that greenhouse gas emissions are not harming the earth and the atmosphere, you are kidding yourselves.


Please don't put your life in the hands, of a rock and roll band, who'll throw it all away - Oasis
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community