- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is there a report detailing the $$ that would've changed hands as a result of Paris Deal?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:50 am
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:50 am
What kind of numbers are we talking about over the next say 50 years? I assume some countries will be paying $$ and a lot more will be receiving $$. I'm just curious what would've US' share have been in this deal? France's? GB? Russia? China?
If anyone could share or point me in the right direction that would be appreciated.
If anyone could share or point me in the right direction that would be appreciated.
This post was edited on 6/2/17 at 8:51 am
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:52 am to STEVED00
I would like to see this as well.
I've seen a lot of numbers thrown around, but the Paris deal wasn't binding, so technically, we could have stayed in the Paris Deal and still not have paid anything, correct? Because we could have made our own programs and paid what we wanted, no?
I've seen a lot of numbers thrown around, but the Paris deal wasn't binding, so technically, we could have stayed in the Paris Deal and still not have paid anything, correct? Because we could have made our own programs and paid what we wanted, no?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:57 am to STEVED00
I read the "developed nations" pledged to give at least $100 billion per year to "developing nations". And that's just the starting point... the floor. They want to increase spending every year.
And I don't know what the U.S.'s portion would have been. Probably a lot like with everything else.
And I don't know what the U.S.'s portion would have been. Probably a lot like with everything else.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:57 am to Salmon
We're America, the world doesn't want us governing ourselves. They expected us to foot the bill almost entirely.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:58 am to Salmon
quote:
he Paris deal wasn't binding, so technically, we could have stayed in the Paris Deal and still not have paid anything, correct?
Then what is the point? Is this whole thing just a kubaya moment for the world to signal some virtue??
BUT - let the USA sign up to a 'non-binding" agreement that has some 'suggestions' that the USA ship $$$$ to somewhere and see how that 'suggestion' is treated by US courts. The 9th circuit would be overwhelmed with lawsuits.
hmmmm - maybe the climate change surge would make the racism lawsuits take the back seat, or at least share some of the emphasis.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 8:59 am to notslim99
quote:
They expected us to foot the bill almost entirely.
But we didn't have to
Their was no contractual agreement that we would fund anything, correct?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:01 am to notslim99
quote:
We're America, the world doesn't want us governing ourselves. They expected us to foot the bill almost entirely.
Exactly this /\
All these global orgs have one goal = bring the USA down to some average that will require the shipment of $$$$ to every under-performing, backward culture, authoritarian, socialist nation in the world.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:03 am to Salmon
quote:
They expected us to foot the bill almost entirely.
But we didn't have to
Question:
If Obama was still president...or Hillary won, would we have paid?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:06 am to Salmon
quote:
But we didn't have to
Their was no contractual agreement that we would fund anything, correct?
Then you would be fighting this battle once a week forever - instead of just booting the whole thing out at once.
Unless there is a binding treaty - requiring the Senate to approve - then we don't need to be associated with it. Just hold a "we want to feed the world" rally and sing some songs and be done with it. That is the only things the SJWs ever actually do.
Nothing prevents the USA from continuing its current direction of reducing CO2 emissions. Nothing prevents private industry from continuing to develop renewal energy ideas. The thing is that every hair-brained scheme will not have a direct tap on the US treasury. Private industry has more of a clear-eyed view of what is reasonable and what is pissing in the wind.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:11 am to CptBengal
quote:
If Obama was still president...or Hillary won, would we have paid?
IMO, yes. And the left would have cheered these payments even though the money would have been borrowed from China.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:21 am to roadGator
Still waiting on this report from the libtards, hate to see this thread end without some numbers to make us conservatives look stupid!
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:22 am to CptBengal
quote:
If Obama was still president...or Hillary won, would we have paid?
Probably
But they aren't, so not sure how that is relevant
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:23 am to ChineseBandit58
I'm still waiting for Seattle or San Francisco to file a lawsuit against Trump asking the courts to file an injunction against pulling out of the accord on the basis that it will irreparably damage the city.
You know for a fact that just like with the travel ban, they can find the right judge and then the 9th circuit will uphold the injunction.
You know for a fact that just like with the travel ban, they can find the right judge and then the 9th circuit will uphold the injunction.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:24 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Then you would be fighting this battle once a week forever - instead of just booting the whole thing out at once.
if Trump truly wanted to negotiate a better deal, don't you think it would have been more effective doing it from inside, rather than trying to negotiate another separate deal?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:25 am to STEVED00
I heard this morning our total commitment would be over 3 TRILLION dollars!
frick that
frick that
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:26 am to GeeOH
quote:
I heard this morning our total commitment would be over 3 TRILLION dollars!
frick that
Could Trump not have cut that from within?
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:26 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:
ou know for a fact that just like with the travel ban, they can find the right judge and then the 9th circuit will uphold the injunction.
Good point.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:27 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
We're America, the world doesn't want us governing ourselves. They expected us to foot the bill almost entirely. Exactly this /\ All these global orgs have one goal = bring the USA down to some average that will require the shipment of $$$$ to every under-performing, backward culture, authoritarian, socialist nation in the world.
The essential objectives of the Globalist Movement are contained in the above quote.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:30 am to Salmon
It was a bs deal all around and you throw those kind of deals off the table when you walk into the room. The problem is nobody else has the nuts to do that so we've gotten used to the establishment type that say "that wouldn't be prudent, blah, blah, blah...). It'd be like if you got into a relationship with a girl and she started saying this is the way things are gonna be based on how I did it with my ex-boyfriend!
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News