patrick.net

Hope Trump does so much damage that we never get over it & end up a failed democracy.
It's on the Republican voters. Enjoy the misery brought on by your ignorance.

socal2 says

Here in California, the poorest people will be hit hardest because they can't afford to live in the nice coastal areas and need AC to cool their homes and have massive commutes to work.

Why can't people understand that coastal elites (the Democrat party leadership) do NOT care about poor people? If they make enough to support themselves, they're not paying enough tax. And if they're not making enough to support themselves, that's also fine because people on welfare vote Democrat mostly!

Quigley says

Why can't people understand that coastal elites (the Democrat party leadership) do NOT care about poor people? If they make enough to support themselves, they're not paying enough tax. And if they're not making enough to support themselves, that's also fine because people on welfare vote Democrat mostly!

Yep. This is one of the main reasons why California has the highest poverty rate in the nation.
http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/jan/20/chad-mayes/true-california-has-nations-highest-poverty-rate-w/

Despite some of the highest taxes in the world and massive welfare programs, Liberals are a total failure in addressing poverty in California.

socal2 says

There are tens of millions of Americans who can't afford to live near their jobs. Many of them live in deep liberal Blue states like California, New York and Washington that already have high taxes and housing development restrictions making the cost of living sky high.

If these states are foolish enough to raise the cost of living even higher implementing Paris accord energy restrictions, many of the residents will certainly boycott and move to greener pastures like Texas - as many are already doing every single week.

Good: chance for CA to become a two-party state again.

This is leonardo dicaprio's yacht. This is the same asshole lecturing you on your carbon footprint.

This is Al Gore’s House. It uses twenty times as much energy as the average American home. $30,000 a year in utility bills yet he thinks he can lecture you on your carbon footprint.

Strategist says

Holy shit. I stand corrected. I revise my statement... most poor, who are on welfare don't work anyway.

I guess if you make $1,800 per month, with 6 kids, you will need welfare. These are the type of people I would respect. At least they are working, and doing their best.

If you were making 3 times this money when you had the 6 kids, you deserve welfare. Otherwise, the only thing you should get for free is a dick-otomy

zzyzzx says

This is Al Gore’s House. It uses twenty times as much energy as the average American home. $30,000 a year in utility bills yet he thinks he can lecture you on your carbon footprint.

A little smaller than Thomas Friedman's Wife mansion-palace. That only is home to two people, when Friedman isn't sucking Corporate Cock in China or Chartres

Elon Musk flies his 650ER all the time. It "Only" uses 490 gallons of fuel an hour at cruising speed.

Great pics, zzyzzx.

Just curious-- does the fact that Gore lives in a big house mean that global warming is fake?

joeyjojojunior says

Just curious-- does the fact that Gore lives in a big house mean that global warming is fake?

At the very minimum it paints him as a non-believer in the very thing he preaches. Like if Pope were to openly bang hoes.

It's like Dan proposing confiscation of assets from the polluters and than balking at the suggestion that his gas-guzzling jalopy should be on the list.

It does? So, if Gore lives in a smaller home, then global warming will be reversed?

It's the same tired argument people make saying if Buffett really wanted to solve income inequality, he could give away all his money. These problems are collective and must be solved as a population.

joeyjojojunior says

It does? So, if Gore lives in a smaller home, then global warming will be reversed?

You're funny.

joeyjojojunior says

It's the same tired argument people make saying if Buffett really wanted to solve income inequality, he could give away all his money. These problems are collective and must be solved as a population.

If the same argument is applied to countries instead of persons you basically have Trump's position on GW measures: why the fuck US has to do more than China, India, Russia?

joeyjojojunior says

Just curious-- does the fact that Gore lives in a big house mean that global warming is fake?

To me it doesn't matter if someone thinks climate change is fake or not. The optics are bad. If Gore truly was worried about climate change he would make at least an honest attempt at reducing his carbon footprint. That house is ridiculous for his age. Normal people, even climate change deniers, usually downsize at that age regardless of their beliefs. It's like, "shit, my kids just moved out. Let's fucking stick it to the globe and double the size of our house."

While I don't know where Gore derives his current wealth (and I don't care to look it up) I'm pretty certain some of it is from his notoriety over climate change. I don't deny that climate is changing, but when one of the most noticeable figureheads of a movement does the complete opposite of what he's preaching it really destroys any validity they may have had. It's like an alcoholic leading an AA meeting drunk.

I certainly agree with that. Gore is politician and not a good spokesperson.

zzyzzx says

This is Al Gore’s House.

This still doesn't mean we shouldn't tax carbon. Hell, if you hate Gore so much, tax his carbon use!

The opulence of the rich does not negate the fact that we're killing ourselves by polluting.

Dan8267 says

if you hate Gore so much, tax his carbon use!

As long as it doesn't bring my standard of living down I'm all for it.

Straw Man says

It's like Dan proposing confiscation of assets from the polluters and than balking at the suggestion that his gas-guzzling jalopy should be on the list.

And that's actually happened today! Of course he will claim that he somehow won that argument.

Tim Aurora says

The US stature is now reduced and we are more isolated than ever.

Hahahahahaha. If this Accord is so ultra special important, why did Macron the GILF Hunter proclaim it was not renegotiable?

Are the Eurocucks so clueless to think this is gonna hurt Trump domestically, and he'd come back on his hands and knees.

Truth is Germany and France are old toothless tigers who think they are the Lion King.

Straw Man says

As long as it doesn't bring my standard of living down I'm all for it.

Are you willing to greatly reduce the standard of living of your grandchildren to slightly increase your own standard of living?

Quigley says

Straw Man says

It's like Dan proposing confiscation of assets from the polluters and than balking at the suggestion that his gas-guzzling jalopy should be on the list.

And that's actually happened today! Of course he will claim that he somehow won that argument.

I'm pretty fucking sure I use significantly less gas than either of you two.

Of course, none of your nonsense is relevant to the fact that we should have a carbon tax and a methane tax and ban coal.

Tim Aurora says

Another point is that this does not buy USA anything except loss of stature

* The agreement was non binding

* US would have been able to achieve most of the goals regardless

* Coal jobs are gone because of abundance of natural gas. No point saving dead technologies

And the States like California are going it alone. The only thing Trump really achieved was to make us look silly.

If it was so pointless, there was no point to sign it.

Tim Aurora says

Another point is that this does not buy USA anything except loss of stature

* The agreement was non binding

* US would have been able to achieve most of the goals regardless

* Coal jobs are gone because of abundance of natural gas. No point saving dead technologies

FortWayne says

If it was so pointless, there was no point to sign it.

Exactly. They need to get their story straight. Was the Paris accord vital to save the world, or was it just a big nothing burger?

America will now be free to continue and increase our natural gas extraction and those exports will help India and China reduce their carbon emissions by using our cleaner gas instead of dirtier North Korean and Chinese coal.

Strategist says

And the States like California are going it alone. The only thing Trump really achieved was to make us look silly.

Gawd. The Democrat morons who have super majorities in my State just passed a Single Payer law too. No clue how to fund it.......the costs are 2X the entire State budget. The same morons that can't run government pensions without bankrupting the state can run the entire State's healthcare? And now California is going to go it alone on Paris?

Talk about looking silly!

socal2 says

Gawd. The Democrat morons who have super majorities in my State just passed a Single Payer law too. No clue how to fund it.......the costs are 2X the entire State budget. The same morons that can't run government pensions without bankrupting the state can run the entire State's healthcare? And now California is going to go it alone on Paris?

The California Democrats really screw up when it comes to pensions and budgets. They think money grows on trees.
Even those who screw up can be right on a few things, and they are right when it comes to pollution caused by fossil fuels. Trump trying to create coal mining jobs is downright stupid. It's a dying industry. Trump may as well try bringing back jobs to Kodak.

Strategist says

socal2 says

Gawd. The Democrat morons who have super majorities in my State just passed a Single Payer law too. No clue how to fund it.......the costs are 2X the entire State budget. The same morons that can't run government pensions without bankrupting the state can run the entire State's healthcare? And now California is going to go it alone on Paris?

The California Democrats really screw up when it comes to pensions and budgets. They think money grows on trees.

Even those who screw up can be right on a few things, and they are right when it comes to pollution caused by fossil fuels. Trump trying to create coal mining jobs is downright stupid. It's a dying industry. Trump may as well try bringing back jobs to Kodak.

You don't think film will be cool again if we label it "hipster"?

Booger says

I think China and India should have stricter emissions standards to make up for having so many people farting.

Hey MOCO, just dosing Rosie O'Donnell and Michael Moore with Beano should have quite an impact.

Of course, that's just common sense. Also, remember, three and a half billion deaths will solve the global warming issue. The man is a genius.

It's not that bad. They'll all be offered a chance to suck the Plenipotentiary's dick and walk around outside the White House fence twenty circuits with their faces covered in his come while chanting "Thank you, merciful Trumpligula!", after which, their sentences will be stayed.

They just got a welcome to the system, the legal system, where bloodthirsty prosecutors throw every charge possible at you as an opening move, hoping to cow you into a hasty plea deal which will give them another win.
Now they'll have to navigate this system, and either capitulate and plea or resist and ask for a trial where the state will have to actually prove the charges. Either way it won't be pleasant, but I doubt any of them will get more than a year.

Next time maybe they shouldn't participate in an anarchist riot! People are sick and fucking tired of that bullshit. Free speech and assembly, not to burn this motha down!

I doubt this agreement was a nothing burger, it simply had little or nothing to do with climate change. My guess would be it had more to do with losing National Sovereignty, yet that's only a guess because really no average American has actually seen what it says....nor anyone in Congress because they were never allowed, even though it is considered a treaty. Which means Congress (the peoples representatives) had been bypassed. That should be the outrage.

Typical political sleight of hand....Of course parents should have an advantage from experience: "I bet you a candy bar, you can't pick up all those Legos and put them into the pail in 1 trip." It's like magic.

Can someone fill me in on what the main arguments are to leave the Paris Accord?

I'm certain there are some good ones

Can anyone actually spell out the terms of the Paris agreement? Any quotes from the treaty itself? No? Oh that's right, it's secret and Congress has never voted to ratify it (and never will). So it was a dead agreement without teeth even before Trump officially dropped it. The USA is leading the world in green energy. We need to keep that up, keep innovating, and then spread the results of our innovation to the world as it becomes in the world's best economic interests to also adopt these new green technologies. There's absolutely zero reason to enter into a lopsided treaty which costs us a lot and actually hampers our growth and innovation while adding a very regressive tax to further oppress the poor and middle classes.

BayArea says

Can someone fill me in on what the main arguments are to leave the Paris Accord?

I'm certain there are some good ones

Sure.......
115. Resolves to enhance the provision of urgent and adequate finance, technology and capacity-building support by developed country Parties in order to enhance the level of ambition of pre-2020 action by Parties, and in this regard strongly urges developed country Parties to scale up their level of financial support, with a concrete roadmap to achieve the goal of jointly providing USD 100 billion annually by 2020 for mitigation and adaptation while significantly increasing adaptation finance from current levels and to further provide appropriate technology and capacity-building support;

Nowhere in the text are designations of National committed contributions. I'm certain they've been defined, however it's not stated clearly. If I'm agreeing to pony up $100 billion annually or any portion thereof, I'd like to know that.

Also, the entire agreement is to be conducted under the auspices of the U.N., who I have major sovereign issues with.

As well, although I have no issues with women's rights and empowerment, I'm not clear as to why this is a defined objective for climate control?

......migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity, Also acknowledging the specific needs and concerns of developing country Parties arising from the impact of the implementation of response measures and, in this regard, decisions 5/CP.7, 1/CP.10, 1/CP.16 and 8/CP.17,

Additionally, collated into the accord, is the Kyoto agreement which was incredibly unfair to the U.S.

Those are just a few issues I have...has anyone read the agreement?

Every US company that moves their operations to China shifts their emissions to a country that does not regulate pollution. They damage our economy when they move to China, then we're supposed to foot the bill again when they pollute freely in another country??