• Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!

To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.

Already a member? Log in here.

Donald Trump withdraws US from Paris CC accord: Where to now?

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by basilio, Jun 2, 2017.

sentifi.com

Aussie Stock Forum Sentifi Top themes and market attention on:

  1. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Donald Trump has announced the US will withdraw from the Paris CC accord. How do we think this will impact international CC agreements, political relations with every other country and God knows what else ?
     
  2. PZ99

    PZ99 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Posts:
    2,175
    Likes Received:
    862
    Joined:
    May 13, 2015
    We can work without Trump and his hot hair :)
     
  3. pixel

    pixel DIY Trader

    Posts:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    319
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    - It will increase requests from the fringe in some other countries to also raise pollution.

    + The Open Letter, as well as tweets, from the vast majority of American business leaders against the exit could have the effect that Industry increases efforts towards sustainable growth and renewable energy without Government interference.

    ? The long-term outcome is uncertain. Given the global spread of sectarian madness, I'm afraid that Malthus will ultimately be proven prophetic.
     
  4. SirRumpole

    SirRumpole

    Posts:
    12,840
    Likes Received:
    2,385
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Maybe consumers around the world will start boycotting US goods and that might teach them a lesson.

    Boycott Chinese and Indian goods as well.
     
  5. Boggo

    Boggo

    Posts:
    3,192
    Likes Received:
    398
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Because the previous guy with the dubious birth certificate and his feet on the desk was too busy the Paris accord was never ratified by the US senate and was never anything more than a proposal.
     
    CanOz likes this.
  6. McLovin

    McLovin

    Posts:
    5,341
    Likes Received:
    229
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    The US President has the constitutional power to enter an international treaty without the approval of the US Senate. There are three methods, only one requires a senate super-majority.
     
  7. Boggo

    Boggo

    Posts:
    3,192
    Likes Received:
    398
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Had the guy who has bought the $8mill house with the big wall around it put it though the latter (which he should have but they didn't expect to lose !) then Trump couldn't have just walked away from it.
     
  8. McLovin

    McLovin

    Posts:
    5,341
    Likes Received:
    229
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Correct. But in reality, the treaty clause is hardly ever used these days. It was drafted at a time before America was a super-power and when international relations could wait while treaties ground through the senate. Over 90% of treaties are by executive agreement today.
     
  9. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Well this is a perfect way to unite the rest of the world against a Donald Trump led US. I think Germany, France and many other European countries will be (largely) politically united in their contempt for Trumps decision to deny the reality of CC. The consequences for trade, intelligence sharing, alliances will be profound. I wouldn't be surprised to see some creative leaks of intelligence information intended to destroy Donald Trump.

    By the same token a decision by the Paris Climate Accord countries to put a carbon tax on exports from nations that aren't part of the accord would seem eminently reasonable...

    I can only see China and Germany coming to the fore politically and industrially as leaders in CC technology.
    I think the US will have very deep splits. Eighty percent of business interests will recognise the madness of dumping the Paris accord and xissing off the rest of the world (in which they have to do business)

    97+% of the scientific community will be equally furious at this insane action. Watch for some serious poaching of scientists to Europe. I think there will be open revolt in a number of institutions which will take the form of protecting all the CC date that is the backbone of our understanding of the issues and situation.

    The Republican Party will watch public opinion take another dive into the depths and this time supported by a swag of big business interest, 60 plus city mayors of all politics, and a growing number of their own party. It will be a political nightmare. It can only be solved by ditching Trump and replacing him with a President who at the very least takes the US back into the accord. And all along the loss of US influence, prestige and hard and soft power across the world will be palpable.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...f0347e9b69b2fb981dc07/?utm_term=.81eb50858932

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...t-climate-change-global-warming-a7766521.html
    https://www.theatlantic.com/science...upport-staying-in-the-paris-agreement/528663/

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/mcmaster-cohn-trump/528609/
     
    pixel and bellenuit like this.
  10. qldfrog

    qldfrog

    Posts:
    3,062
    Likes Received:
    1,352
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Can I add a different view?
    while I firmly believe that global warming is happening, I also believe that the previous efforts were a joke and economic suicide.
    The only way to slow GW (and I do not say climate change if it can be noted) is reduce population, and obviously improve technology/reduce loss, etc;
    These global agreements are just talk fest and feel good talk show;
    you noted: "By the same token a decision by the Paris Climate Accord countries to put a carbon tax on exports from nations that aren't part of the accord would seem eminently reasonable..."
    I fully agree and that is the reason the previous Accord was wrong: you need to put an economic cost so that a country implementing these economic costs can protect itself and its people..you know the people who try to live under the governing clique..from ecologic vandals;
    It should be the same for worker rights and overall ecological impact;
    =>trade barriers [supposed to be a bad ugly world these days];

    So good on you Trump if you get out and implement an internal reduction program with duties to protect your industry;
    ..I know it will not happen by the way !!! :cautious:

    And it could be a saviour for millions in the remaining west if this triggers an import carbon tax;
    Even if the exemptions for our "poorer friends we need to assist will make it worthless

    It is sad when ideology try to twist facts, as Trump does,
    but also as the "progressive/socialism hords" (an insult to the name in my humble opinion) try to make you understand that you should loose your job because you are guilty of having had industrious ancestors, a successfull country and should let your world be distroyed by other ecological savages , just so that it is "fair"
    rant over
    Have a nice week end, and the world is not over , at least not more than it was last week...
     
  11. wayneL

    wayneL Rotaredom

    Posts:
    17,509
    Likes Received:
    1,145
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    I want a new accord, an agreement that those bleating about GW most, stop running around in private jets, motorcades and living in massive energy and resource gobbling houses.

    I'll happily live in a cave lit by candles, eating insects, berries and and bean shoots, if *they* lead by example.
     
  12. DB008

    DB008

    Posts:
    3,787
    Likes Received:
    153
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    What were the conditions of the CC agreement?

    Please outline....


    Did China and India sign up? Why should the USA (and Australia) come to these agreements and put themselves at a disadvantage while other countries aren't bound to do anything?

    We were dumb enough to donate 10% of carbon tax to the U.N. imagine what was in this deal...
     
  13. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    DB it's worth getting up to speed re the Paris CC accord.
    India and China have signed the accord. To date there are 195 signatories to the. The only refusal have been Nicaragua and Syria (because of the civil war)

    It is not a binding agreement. Countries can choose the rate at which they move to a low carbon economy.
    Nationally determined contributions and their limits

    220px-Global_emissions_country_2014.png

    Global carbon dioxide emissions by country (US EPA)

    The contributions that each individual country should make in order to achieve the worldwide goal are determined by all countries individually and called "nationally determined contributions" (NDCs).[5] Article 3 requires them to be "ambitious", "represent a progression over time" and set "with the view to achieving the purpose of this Agreement". The contributions should be reported every five years and are to be registered by the UNFCCC Secretariat.[12] Each further ambition should be more ambitious than the previous one, known as the principle of 'progression'.[13] Countries can cooperate and pool their nationally determined contributions. The Intended Nationally Determined Contributions pledged during the 2015 Climate Change Conference serve—unless provided otherwise—as the initial Nationally determined contribution.


    The level of NDCs set by each country[7] will set that country's targets. However the 'contributions' themselves are not binding as a matter of international law, as they lack the specificity, normative character, or obligatory language necessary to create binding norms.[14] Furthermore, there will be no mechanism to force[6] a country to set a target in their NDC by a specific date and no enforcement if a set target in an NDC is not met


    Check out the Wikipedia site for more information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

    The Paris accord is not intended to force people into candle lit caves eating grubs, berries and bean shoots. That's purely an option for idiots or trolls who are unable to sustain a sensible conversation.
     
  14. wayneL

    wayneL Rotaredom

    Posts:
    17,509
    Likes Received:
    1,145
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    No, it is a linguistic tool called hyperbole.

    Namecalling on the other hand, is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad hominem and clearly against asf code if conduct.

    My point is fair, if we follow the example of Gore, DiCaprio, et al, we WILL all be huddled on mountain tops surrounded by boiling oceans. (I would like to point out that was another use of hyperbole, seeing as you seem incapable of discerning the same)
     
  15. luutzu

    luutzu

    Posts:
    7,956
    Likes Received:
    1,051
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    The US isn't bound to them either. So it make no political sense to withdraw from it. It just publicly slap all the other 199 countries in the face.

    Give China, India, German and France the opportunity to step up and lead the world.

    It's Politics 101 man. You don't go into another country to take their oil, you go in to "liberate" them (the people, liberate the people, not the oil). Duhh!

    You don't quit a climate change initiative... you "lead" and negotiate with the world to save the children, the poor, the coloured folks... then while people are busy watching the grins and smiles, you secretly sign off on pipelines, export fracking and glut the market so oil prices drop, R&D into more efficient engines, into new alternative are cancelled... increase fossil consumption.

    I guess these basic ideas can't fit into a Tweet so the Yellow Emperor can understand.
     
  16. luutzu

    luutzu

    Posts:
    7,956
    Likes Received:
    1,051
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Is that another way of saying Climate Change is a Chinese hoax to weaken American industries? That since they can pollute, why can't we?

    There's some 70,000 coal mining jobs in the US right now. Guess how many jobs there are in the solar industry there? 1 million. And that's with not much help or encouragement from their government.

    ExxonMobil alone receive someting like $4 billion a year in tax credit. Why? No idea. They're the biggest and most profitable corporation in the world, but they need the extra cash to incentivise them to do something.
     
  17. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    "The Paris accord is not intended to force people into candle lit caves eating grubs, berries and bean shoots. That's purely an option for idiots or trolls who are unable to sustain a sensible conversation." Bas

    No, it is a linguistic tool called hyperbole.

    No Wayne it's just idiotic trolling purporting to be dressed up in miniscule transparent figleaf.
    I didn't name you Wayne. You do an excellent job of making your own attitudes crystal clear .

    Just to be clear
    1) This thread is largely exploring the political fallout of Trump attempting to remove the US from a world wide Climate Change accord.
    2) In the conversations about moving to a carbon free economy, reducing waste, becoming more energy efficient no-one envisages the candle lit cave living on berries scenario as a consequence of tackling CC .

    Is this a possible future scenario ? Yep. Just let's just keep pumping Greenhouse Gases into the atmosphere and ignoring the consequences. We can certainly destroy civilisation as we know it. No probs at all.

    Which coincidentally appears to be the strategy of the climate change deniers/ climate change gradualists/other assorted nonsense.
     
  18. wayneL

    wayneL Rotaredom

    Posts:
    17,509
    Likes Received:
    1,145
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Well, I see a political sea change with regards to CC agreements.

    Trump telling them to naff off is refreshing and may be the beginning of some sanity entering international politics.

    It is also entertaining to witness the chagrin of <censored > like basilio. The weeping and gnashing of teeth warms the soul. :D
     
    Bintang likes this.
  19. basilio

    basilio

    Posts:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    1,202
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Vacuous reality denying dribble.. The sanity that will enter international politics is the realisation the US under Trump has no place as an international leader on almost any issue.

    Carry on up the Nile Wayne. The promised land is awaiting !
     
  20. explod

    explod explod

    Posts:
    6,985
    Likes Received:
    540
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Surely you place your intellectual measurement above the Trump.

    But then if we cannot comprehend the suffering and death caused by dirty coal then I suppose....

    The shutting down and cancellation of plans for new coal powered plants in favour of huge solar islands by China is just part of the worldwide rush to save our planet.
     
Loading...

Share This Page