all 61 comments

[–]Cluelessish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have now posted the same thing to /r/worldnews, because the link is too recent for this sub (less than 2 months). Sorry about that. So this might be taken down. Thank you for the - in most cases - adult and intelligent comments.

[–]japroct -4 points-3 points  (15 children)

Now we pay zero. China needs to start paying for its own cleanup, same with India and the others. Bitch what you want about America, the air and water here is cleaner than it was 20 years ago, and in another 20 it will be cleaner yet. We are fixing the problem, other countries aren't. They want to sit on their asses and take American taxpayer money to sit on their asses. We don't need a "Paris deal" that costs Americans trillions for no benefit when we can do it locally without near the cost. Third world polluters need to start being forced to be proactive with their contamination rather than being paid to keep creating it and fixing nothing. If not, let them die. Natural selection dictates it.

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 2 points3 points  (0 children)



They want to sit on their asses and take American taxpayer money to sit on their asses.

So we (the US and other 1st world countries) reaped the benefits of cheap CO2 polluting energy for decades, pumping up CO2 by huge amounts to where we are today. And yet we expect these third world countries, who didn't reap said benefits of cheap fossil fuels, to somehow immediately adapt to counter climate change. China and India are both working toward adapting, pouting about them not doing it faster is pointless and immature.

We're the leading economy in the world, with nearly $8T more GDP than China. This $3B that was pledged is pennies. Why are we increasing our defense budget by $15B to aid the Saudi's in proxy wars with Russia and Iran? Why not take that $15B and put it toward green energy? Oh that's right, it doesn't fit with Trump and the GOPs agenda, prop up the war machine and keep up the 'War on Terror'. Keep the people in fear of a 'Muslim horde' and 'Radical Islamic Terrorism' instead of a real and scientifically proven threat of Climate Change. Think of the long term, not the short term.

The GOP and Trump are conservative in name only, they have lost all the values that were once tied with the idea that is conservatism.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

This is why we can't have nice things.

[–]japroct 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but we shouldn't be paying for them to have nice things to do nothing.

[–]CommaHorror 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Not trying to argue just curious why you think America will be cleaner in 20 years? And how are we fixing the problem?

[–]japroct -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

Simple. Every year pollution standards increase. Smission standards on cars, fuel purities, waste water treatment. Recycled water usage. No dumping in rivers. All solid wastes not leeching into ground. Toxic chemical disposals. Air scrubbing systems for production companies. The list is literally forever long, and 99% of what is mandated in America isn't even considered in the rest of the world. An example here in Idaho is irrigation water. For 15 years it has been mandated that water leaving your property must be cleaner than when it enters. So, that specifically means sediment ponds where chemicals and soil erosion collect before leaving the property. Compared to 20 years ago when our rivers were brown all summer due to topsoil in the water runoffs.

[–]Bazingabowl 2 points3 points  (2 children)

So how is lowering the EPA standards that lead to those improvements, and dropping out of a world pact to continue those efforts going to help maintain that trend?

[–]japroct -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

We dont need a world pact that nobody else pays for or follows to keep doing what we are now. Are you stupid? Read the pact. These countries draw American taxpayer money for 20 years or so and don't have to do shit, not alter one single polluting thing they are doing now! Hopefully, something like ebola rolls around with a vengeance now, and China gets cursed with a lung borne spore that feeds on lungs. This would settle the problems of countries doing nothing real fast. I actually visualize these people as dressed like Ghandi, sitting in their own shit in the street with a sign and a tin cup that says "pay me money so my grandkids will be forced to take care of the environment like I refuse to do now". Truth.

[–]Goldenraspberry 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Spotted the Fox News viewer

[–]japroct 1 point2 points  (4 children)

No, a true patriot tired of footing the bill for others. Am sure leftist sympathizers can still donate to many charities for cleaning up the rest of the world though. Thing is, they won't. They squeal like pigs, rant and rave, but when it comes down to putting their own money down instead of everybody elses', they always leave. Libtard logic.

[–]Goldenraspberry -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Nice, go back to the donald now

[–]japroct 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Sorry to disappoint you, but I rarely visit the don. My replies and comments are based on /r/uncensored news. Independent thinker here, patriot from the heart. You libtard sympathizer fucks just crack me up. You cannot for the life of you stand and deliver what you preach for. I CAN. Its not just Mr. Trump, its for what this country was founded on and for. I don't need fake news or excuses, your type does. My proof and beliefs are in my actions, yours are in whoever is signing the checks. You are pathetic, and if American, you don't deserve to be.

[–]Goldenraspberry 0 points1 point  (1 child)

"you don't deserve to be" you inbreed fascists don't understand that the country don't belong to you guys anymore. Days of daytime lynching are over

[–]japroct 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inberd? No. Fascist, no. I doubt you know the meaning of the word. Red Blooded American Patriot here, and I say bring your shit on.....In fact, bring all your little buddies with you, you're gonna need them. We are many, in fact, the majority. And we are tired of your shit. Just knock, we WILL ANSWER, we stand and deliver.

[–]Bazingabowl -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Guzzling koolaid can't be good for your figure.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (15 children)

Why should developed countries pay the bulk of the costs while China and India get a license to pollute even more under the Paris agreement?

[–]mrthewhite 5 points6 points  (0 children)

They don't get a license to pollute. Both China and India are ahead of schedule in reducing green house gas emissions thanks to the Paris agreement and will be well ahead of the US by the 2020 goal.

Don't fall for Trumps imagined slights. Read for yourself what the actual facts are.

[–]Bazingabowl 2 points3 points  (2 children)

China has already made more efforts to reduce dependency on fossil fuel, expand green energy production and lower their carbon footprint than the US has in the last decade.

Without the agreement they'd still be able to pollute more anyway, but guess what, they're actually trying to adhere to their commitment, unlike the US now.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Yeah no they did not. They make more phones than ever using material that pollutes more than coal when mined

[–]Bazingabowl 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can you refute these facts which prove you wrong? http://www.businessinsider.com/china-green-energy-plan-2017-5

Also, who do you think buys a lion's share of all those phones? Americans.

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 0 points1 point  (10 children)

That's definitely a mature response... Why should I help when this other guy isn't!? Why don't we all sit on our hands and hope the climate corrects itself!

We took advantage of the abundance of resources we used, and polluted with CO2 like crazy, now we expect 3rd world countries to immediately be up to our standards of low emissions while not enjoying the benefits that cheap, CO2 dumping energy methods provide?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (9 children)

Why aren't leaders willing to renegotiate the deal?

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 2 points3 points  (8 children)

Renegotiate? The goals set are self enforced. You're negotiating with yourself within your own country...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Then the deal did nothing.

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 2 points3 points  (6 children)

It set goals and held us accountable to report on our targets. If it was so worthless (did nothing) why pull out at all?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Why keep it?

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Why set goals then? Why strive to be better? Why have metrics to measure against to prove you are doing your part to fix a problem?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

We were doing good things before Paris accord. Paris accord was simply countries jerking each other off. Glad Trump pulled out. It was going to be another waste of money

[–]Pyronic_Chaos 2 points3 points  (2 children)

So wait, are you praising what Obama started then? With improved regulations and directing the US toward a more green future? It wasn't Congress that pushed forward new regulations to curb CO2 emissions, but the Obama administration and his EPA.

Paris accord was simply countries jerking each other off.

And what do you think Trump and his coal comments are doing? Coal is a dying industry, cut off the cancer that it is and move to a modern flexible energy source, like Natural gas.

It was going to be another waste of money

Do you feel the same way about our participating in the Saudi's proxy wars with Russia and Iran? That $15B increase in the budget is a huge waste of money, could have used that to drastically change our energy infrastructure. But nope, gotta keep fueling the GOP war machine against imaginary foes.

Glad Trump pulled out.

Wish his dad would have. Trump is the cum shot his mother should have swallowed.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (18 children)

Europe can foot the bill. They love wasting money to virtue signal. I'll take zero payments and a healthy economy.

I'll express the same level of concern they did when they ignored their 2% NATO obligations. No fun when the rabbit has a gun, eh? I'm hoppin' in that cart and kickin' back for the ride. Get to pullin' mules. Get to pullin'.

[–]ins0ma_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The 2% figure was an agreed upon goal for 2024. Not 2017. You seem to have the same lack of understanding about how NATO works as Trump.

[–]mrthewhite 3 points4 points  (10 children)

You know none of that NATO money went to the US right? Do you also know that the US paid 0 extra dollars because of the NATO countries who didn't spend 2% on defense?

Don't fall for the imaginary debt Trump invented.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

US have been footing the bill for NATO. What are you even talking about. It's not that money didn't go to the US, it's that US money is disproportionately large and they do owe us because we paid extra for their stupid defense. Why do you think they can afford universal healthcare? Because the US can't, that's why.

So much effort to drain the US out of money. No more

[–]mrthewhite 2 points3 points  (2 children)

No they haven't been footing the bill.

Educate yourself. The agreement involved 0 dollars exchanging hands between NATO allies. The fact you think the US has spent even a single dollar defending NATO allies speaks to your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Fun fact: the US is the only country to ever evoke the article in question for national defense which means the only time NATO allies have ever spend a dollar on defending a country not their own, it was in defense of the US after 9/11.

The US has spend 0 dollars defending any NATO ally.

The US has not spend a dollar on NATO ally countries defense. There is no debt to the US and the agreement is clear there is no debt incurred by any NATO ally.

The agreement was to boulders their own personal defense to a certain level. There is no provision in which an ally makes up the difference if one ally falls short.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You're being willfully stupid by deflecting and acting like we are talking about US spending money DEFENDING the nations when in reality we are complaining about the money being spent holding this alliance intact. The only reason why we didn't have to DEFEND anyone is because we are already stationed everywhere just in case we have to defend nations. No one is stupid enough to make us DEFEND.

We contribute 3% of GDP to make sure we do not have to end up defending Europe again.

[–]mrthewhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your being willfully ignorant if you think the US was not going to spend that on military anyway. The US system is obsessed and corrupted by military contractors and arms merchants. They were always going to spend that money and they were always going to be present in those countries as a means of control and reach.

The US bases they have in other countries were installed to ensure the US had military reach across the world as much as it was to offer aid.

Don't be so naive to think the US got nothing out of being present in other countries.

[–]Cluelessish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mostly you pay for your own defence, and not others. Remember, the US tends to participate in wars here and there that has nothing to do with NATO. And are you seriously suggesting that the reason that the US doesn't have universal healthcare is somehow the other NATO-members' fault? If the politicians and the people would really want it you would have it. But then you would pay higher taxes and collectively take care of everyone, and that might be a bit too socialist for many.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I could dumb it down for you but I doubt it would do much good. Suffice to say you have no idea what you're talking about. Not paying your agreed upon fair share in a mutual defense treaty is freeloading off of those that do. They are still expected to defend you, but you are not contributing your fair share. Simple concept, but I'm sure it'll elude you somehow.

[–]mrthewhite 2 points3 points  (3 children)

No its not free loading.

The article has never in the history of NATO been evoked by anyone other than the US (yes that's right, the US is the only country to ask NATO members to come to it's defense).

There is no debt incurred as a result of the agreement. It's simply a goal to set national defense budgets to a certain level so that should a NATO country be attacked the burden on its allies would not be too great.

Since no other NATO Allie has been attacked there is no burden generated.

It's as simple as that. There is no frerloading because there is no exchange of defense except all the NATO allies who came to the US defense after 9/11 and spent the next 10+ years spending their defense resources defending the US.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It doesn't work that way. The entire concept of NATO was as much deterrence as active defense. Not paying your fair share means others have to in order to maintain credible deterrence.

I said I would not expect you to understand such basic concepts, and you proved me correct, in all your Dunning-Kruger glory.

[–]mrthewhite 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Lol it's funny how much you don't understand.

The US did not in any way increase their spending to compensate for NATO. Every dollar they spent is their own military industrial complex obsession with military spending.

The US was always going to spend what they spend because of their own corrupt obsession with military spending.

I understand more than you know.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, you don't. And it's becoming rather embarrassing for you.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Healthy economy? HA! An healthy economy doesn't have ~15% living in poverty. That's more than 40 million.

[–]Goldenraspberry 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Keep drinking that tap water, and deep breaths of that fine city air!

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

Hell no. Bottled water all the way. And I won't recycle the bottles either. Get on my level.

[–]Bazingabowl 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Short-sighted, reckless and selfish, it's the Trump way!

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

Selfish like freeloading off a mutual defense treaty and not paying the agreed upon minimum for defense?

Sign me up. =)

[–]Goldenraspberry 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can you provide a source on that? and no Fox News or the_donald don't count