• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat Trump to pull US out of Paris Agreement

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If money is the issue, the US can simply stay within the Paris agreement & STOP paying $$.
They can then open discussions on getting better terms.

By withdrawing from the accord Trump is giving up on all the potential money that the US companies could make developing & selling green technologies.

His claim that he was doing it for Pittsburgh is laughable because Pittsburgh voted for Hilary & they have adopting many green technologies & see it as the future. Suspect that the main reason he decided to withdraw from Paris was because it was supported by Obama.

bs. tiongs will copy u.s. technologies and sell them cheaper to both developed and developing nations. there's a lot of money to be had for tiongs in this. tails we lose. heads they win. they have already reverse engineered the tesla and some of its secret sauce, not all.
 

johnny333

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
bs. tiongs will copy u.s. technologies and sell them cheaper to both developed and developing nations. there's a lot of money to be had for tiongs in this. tails we lose. heads they win. they have already reverse engineered the tesla and some of its secret sauce, not all.

Of course the Tiongs will try to steal the technology. Just have to look at all the iPhone knock offs out there.
A smart company will know how to keep their secrets, otherwise they will go bankrupt. Take a look at the positives e.g. jobs will be created for IT security staff in the US.

By turning his back on the Paris accord Trump is not helping the US companies. That is why so many US companies including the large oil companies are actually supporters of the Paris accord.
 

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Of course the Tiongs will try to steal the technology. Just have to look at all the iPhone knock offs out there.
A smart company will know how to keep their secrets, otherwise they will go bankrupt. Take a look at the positives e.g. jobs will be created for IT security staff in the US.

By turning his back on the Paris accord Trump is not helping the US companies. That is why so many US companies including the large oil companies are actually supporters of the Paris accord.

corporations do not have the interests and welfare of taxpayers in mind. they are after their own business objectives. if they can get corporate welfare from gov funding they will actively pursue it.
 

johnny333

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
corporations do not have the interests and welfare of taxpayers in mind. they are after their own business objectives. if they can get corporate welfare from gov funding they will actively pursue it.


Even if the gov't is involved they still create jobs in the private sector.
Look at NASA. Many of the technologies that they develop were used in the private sector.

Recently we see the US authorities approach a private Israeli company to hack the iPhone's security. Even the Russians & North Koreans use private hackers. So even if it is the gov't doing it, they are tapping the private contractors.
 

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Even if the gov't is involved they still create jobs in the private sector.
Look at NASA. Many of the technologies that they develop were used in the private sector.

Recently we see the US authorities approach a private Israeli company to hack the iPhone's security. Even the Russians & North Koreans use private hackers. So even if it is the gov't doing it, they are tapping the private contractors.

it's naive to think that jobs created as a result of the paris accord will stay in the u.s. the $100b pledged for developing cuntries will be spent in developing cuntries, and these cuntries will demand enterprises, company investments, and infrastructure projects that benefit from this funding to be owned nationally with majority stakes as part of jv's in respective cuntries. these jv's will seek technology transfer deals and encourage u.s. firms to transfer not only technology but also manufacturing capability over. once there, the govs sanction so called local r&d institutions that conduct industrial espionage to disseminate stolen proprietary info to other local startups and companies in order for them to compete on cost with the latest tech. survival and long term prospects of u.s. companies in these jv's are bleak and shortlived. after getting sucked dry for their technologies and ipr's, they lanlan close shop and balik kampung, only to discover cheaper competing products in their own backyard in the u.s. market, which is the holy grail of markets and ultimate target market of all copycats. on both fronts they ultimately lose in profitability and business survival. what kind of stupid suicidal corporate strategy is that? these ceo's are paid millions just to hype their stocks up on wall street for the short term. their strategies never go beyond 6.9 years, while strategies of the tiong industrial complex aided by the prc gov are at least 69 years in the planning time frame. meanwhile, prc is sucking in the latest u.s. nuclear energy tech where inventors and investors have a tough time in the u.s. and japan finding domestic implementors after the fukushima disaster.
 

johnny333

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
it's naive to think that jobs created as a result of the paris accord will stay in the u.s. the $100b pledged for developing cuntries will be spent in developing cuntries, and these cuntries will demand enterprises, company investments, and infrastructure projects that benefit from this funding to be owned nationally with majority stakes as part of jv's in respective cuntries. these jv's will seek technology transfer deals and encourage u.s. firms to transfer not only technology but also manufacturing capability over. once there, the govs sanction so called local r&d institutions that conduct industrial espionage to disseminate stolen proprietary info to other local startups and companies in order for them to compete on cost with the latest tech. survival and long term prospects of u.s. companies in these jv's are bleak and shortlived. after getting sucked dry for their technologies and ipr's, they lanlan close shop and balik kampung, only to discover cheaper competing products in their own backyard in the u.s. market, which is the holy grail of markets and ultimate target market of all copycats. on both fronts they ultimately lose in profitability and business survival. what kind of stupid suicidal corporate strategy is that? these ceo's are paid millions just to hype their stocks up on wall street for the short term. their strategies never go beyond 6.9 years, while strategies of the tiong industrial complex aided by the prc gov are at least 69 years in the planning time frame. meanwhile, prc is sucking in the latest u.s. nuclear energy tech where inventors and investors have a tough time in the u.s. and japan finding domestic implementors after the fukushima disaster.


If there is no money to be made then why are so many US companies backing the Paris accord? Many own a large part of their company & want to see their companies to succeed. These people are hard nosed businessmen.

They obviously see the business opportunies of green technology. Green technology is the future & people like Trump are dinosaurs looking to the past that made US great.

Do you have an example of a centrally planned economy that is successful? Russia? Cuba? Spore? I don't think Spore is a good example :smile:
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
If there is no money to be made then why are so many US companies backing the Paris accord? Many own a large part of their company & want to see their companies to succeed. These people are hard nosed businessmen.

They obviously see the business opportunies of green technology. Green technology is the future & people like Trump are dinosaurs looking to the past that made US great.

Do you have an example of a centrally planned economy that is successful? Russia? Cuba? Spore? I don't think Spore is a good example :smile:

The companies that back the Paris accord are the ones with vested interests in perpetrating the climate change scam.

The companies that are against the Paris accord are those that would benefit from increased use of fossil fuels/coal.

The truth regarding this hugely emotive issue lies somewhere in between. Only the creator knows exactly what is going on with the climate and how much mankind is contributing to any changes in the mean temperature of planet earth. Everything else is just guesswork. Stats are being twisted to suit agendas by both proponents and opponents.

Green technologies are not all they're made out to be. For example biofuels are actually worse than fossil fuels.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/biofuels-worse-fossil-fuels-says-expert
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
i bet if theres a paris soxiante neuf menage a trois agua de berber voulez vous coucher avec moi to drink wine,gourmandize,have an orgy and 69 with french lolitas all night and eat cheese fondue with a baguette while having an orgy i bet this fat fuck will be there first thing in the morning to sign the guest book.

between anyone who drops their bread in the cheese has to perform a penalty.
 
Last edited:

johnny333

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
One of the reasons Trump used to justify withdrawing from the accord was a MIT study. However according to the authors of the study Trump misunderstood the study. I think Trump deliberately twisted the findings to suit his ends


http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/02/trum...limate-research-university-officials-say.html
Trump misunderstood MIT climate research, university officials say

Massachusetts Institute of Technology officials said U.S. President Donald Trump badly misunderstood their research when he cited it on Thursday to justify withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement.

Trump announced during a speech at the White House Rose Garden that he had decided to pull out of the landmark climate deal, in part because it would not reduce global temperatures fast enough to have a significant impact.

"Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a two-tenths of one degree Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100," Trump said.

"Tiny, tiny amount."

That claim was attributed to research conducted by MIT, according to White House documents seen by Reuters. The Cambridge, Massaschusetts-based research university published a study in April 2016 titled "How much of a difference will the Paris Agreement make?" showing that if countries abided by their pledges in the deal, global warming would slow by between 0.6 degree and 1.1 degrees Celsius by 2100.

"We certainly do not support the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris agreement," said Erwan Monier, a lead researcher at the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, and one of the study's authors.



"If we don't do anything, we might shoot over 5 degrees or more and that would be catastrophic," said John Reilly, the co-director of the program, adding that MIT's scientists had had no contact with the White House and were not offered a chance to explain their work.

The Paris accord, reached by nearly 200 countries in 2015, was meant to limit global warming to 2 degrees or less by 2100, mainly through country pledges to cut carbon dioxide and other emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.

Under the pact, the United States - the world's second biggest carbon emitter behind China - had committed to reduce its emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.



A senior administration official defended Trump's use of the findings. "It's not just MIT. I think there is a consensus, not only in the environmental community, but elsewhere that the Paris agreement in and of itself will have a negligible impact on climate," the official told reporters at a briefing.

The dispute is the latest round of a years-long battle between scientists and politicians over how to interpret facts about the effects of burning fossil fuels on the global climate, and translate them into policy.

Trump has repeatedly cast doubt on the science of climate change and once called it a hoax perpetrated by China to weaken U.S. business.
 

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
when trump withdrew prematurely (after obama deposited $3b worth of cum) from the paris accord and made his speech at the wh, there's no mention of climate change. the early late withdrawal is not about climate change. it's about funding. the pledge is $100m as a base, and from there it will escalate to billions over the course of decades, and that u.n. institution administering it will get bloated and corrupted asking for more money to do very little. he's doing what every conservative should be doing - cut the bloated bureaucracy and gov overspending and wastes.
 
Top