On Nov 17, 10:31 am, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
They're starting on their own, 2pid. We still outdo them in many
areas. Perhaps we should (and I know this is not how your 'mind'
works) take care of business at home before pointing fingers
elsewhe
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/wo...a/26china.html
You always make irrelevant links that actually prove my point.
Do you actually think that the people of China will not do anything
about it? There is already civil unrest over the issue. The government
recognizes there is a problem and they are trying to take steps
(albeit unsucessfully so far, but that will likely change) and the
people certainly do.
As we impose restrictions domestically without trade restrictions
then manufacturing just moves to contract manufacturers in China
who are supplied with energy from coal fired plants with no restrictions
nor concerns.
You of course get cheap goods.
Which gets back to outsourcing and trade agreements. And it proves my
point perfectly: business does only that which is good for business.
Voluntary measures will not work.
You don't want to stop immigration to our own country which drives our
polluting economic growth.
I never said that, either, 2pid. Are you capable of making an argument
without making **** up? LOL!
I've been arguing that point and all you have for it is ridicule.
I stated my position in another post. You are against ALL immigration.
I am not.
You have no clearly stated positions beyond childish ridicule
of others who do.
I have positions. You've never asked for them before. I ahev asked for
yours. You tend to bail when that happens.
What do you want to do?
Kyoto is not designed as a "be all, end all" solution. It's designed
as a start. Recognizing that developing countries would have more
strain by limiting emissions, Kyoto built in some considerations. I
think Kyoto should be adopted by the US.
I think in such a dire situation the idea that we can afford
Kyoto exempt zones in a global economy will just accelerate the destruction
of forests and habitat left which happen to reside in 3rd world
(Kyoto exempt) territories.
Rainforests have been getting destroyed for several decades. Kyoto may
or may not change that. CITES tries to help halt that. While CITES is
a step i the right direction, it is not a "be all, end all" either.
For example, some tonewoods are on that list. Try to find guitars, for
example, that are currently produced with Brazilian Rosewood.
I believe that if we are to be taken seriously, we need to have *our*
house in order before we start worrying about what others are doing.
We do not.
It's like trying to turn an aircraft carrier. You can't turn it on a
dime. You have to start somewhere.
A good start is by not destroying what little natural C02 sinks
(rain forests, peat fields etc) that are left. Kyoto accelerates
that.
Proof? Is the Chinese pollution problem and the resultant damage to
the environment simply a result of Kyoto? Is Brazilian rainforest
deforestation? I don't think so:
http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm
BTW, I have not checked this site for *their* motivation, but business
certainly looks like a potential culprit...