China Refuses to Cut Carbon Emissions - They'd Rather Develop Their Economy!

[Lamarr]

China will not make a binding commitment to reduce carbon emissions, putting in jeopardy the prospects for a global pact on climate change.

Officials from Beijing told a UN conference in Bonn yesterday that China would increase its emissions to develop its economy rather than sign up to mandatory cuts.

The refusal is a setback for President Obama’s efforts to drum up support for an agreement at Copenhagen in December on a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol. As argument erupted between rich and poor nations at the Bonn talks, Yvo de Boer, the UN climate change chief, said that a worldwide pact to prevent global warming was “physically impossible”.

Hopes that Copenhagen might deliver tougher carbon reduction targets were dashed further when Japan failed to make a significant commitment to reduce emissions. Taro Aso, the Japanese Prime Minister, said on Wednesday that Japan would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 15 per cent by 2020 from levels in 2005. The Japanese commitment is a mere 2 per cent improvement on its commitment under Kyoto.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6481997.ece

I'd kinda like to work on our economy as well

 

[thoughtone]

You fail to realize they are one in the same.

 

[Lamarr]

You fail to realize they are one in the same.

huh? please explain

 

[Gunner]

China is lookin to become a major player ( like their not already ). There are many in the left who use environmental concerns to oppose free market capitalism and industry, they see it as a great evil. These are the same people who claimed the earth was cooling in the seventies. Oh no wait it's warming now. Carbon dioxide, the primary green house gas produced by burning fossil fuel, is not a toxic pollutant. In fact, CO2 is vital for life on earth. If your that anal about carbon dioxide kill yourself. It will be one less person person polluting the earth.

 

[Lamarr]

China is lookin to become a major player ( like their not already ). There are many in the left who use environmental concerns to oppose free market capitalism and industry, they see it as a great evil.

Are you saying China is embracing Capitalism while those on the left are in opposition to Industry? I thought China was a communist country

 

[actinanass]

You fail to realize they are one in the same.

Yea thought EXPLAIN!!!

*wait for a huffington post article to pop up*

 

[actinanass]

Are you saying China is embracing Capitalism while those on the left are in opposition to Industry? I thought China was a communist country

hell they more conservative than Obama....

 

[Gunner]

Are you saying China is embracing Capitalism while those on the left are in opposition to Industry? I thought China was a communist country

I'm of the notion that China can care less about party affiliation. These people are not ignorant to logic and what works. Hell, look at the national test scores in math and science. I attended a conference in Dallas last November. One of the seminars I popped in on centered around some of the more affluent children in China. These children are learning chinese and English simultaneously. Hell, most of our children in this country can't speak the kings English. They are learning our culture while we are watching American idol. Yes the left is against industry. If we would have drilled in Alaska 10 years ago we could been reduced our dependency on foreign oil.

Drug dealers can care less about party affiliations but nontheless practice the ideology of capitalism. I think we should keep in place the actions that built this country. Until someone locks themselves in there garage and come up with the next best thing we have to use what we got. Honetly, Lamarr I think China is a sleeping Giant. How do you think Russia recovered so fast. Your thoughts?

 

[cthomas0964]

So does this mean Obama is going to still go forward even though its going to cost us billions?

 

[Gunner]

So does this mean Obama is going to still go forward even though its going to cost us billions?

Great question!!!! My friend remember this phrase "well intentions". The left are never interested in results or what is logical, only the look that they actually care about the plight of the union worker or someone in poverty. The best in a non perfect world we can expect are trade offs or compromises. Follow me here, there are many variables that play into someone becoming homeless. Was it because he or she lost his job, drinking, bad investment, drugs or following an example of failure. Since LBJ's, War on poverty we have spent over a trillion dollars to lift people from poverty. Mindsets have to be changed within. Many on the left champion the democrats as the party of the little guy but I beg to differ. You can't legislate morality. In the end, cap and trade will hurt the single mom already struggling to make ends meet. What chaps my hide is the celebrities who are for all of this environmental crap ( Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins ) can afford the screw ups of the government. It's always poor people who are the victims of environmental policies.

 

[actinanass]

Great question!!!! My friend remember this phrase "well intentions". The left are never interested in results or what is logical, only the look that they actually care about the plight of the union worker or someone in poverty. The best in a non perfect world we can expect are trade offs or compromises. Follow me here, there are many variables that play into someone becoming homeless. Was it because he or she lost his job, drinking, bad investment, drugs or following an example of failure. Since LBJ's, War on poverty we have spent over a trillion dollars to lift people from poverty. Mindsets have to be changed within. Many on the left champion the democrats as the party of the little guy but I beg to differ. You can't legislate morality. In the end, cap and trade will hurt the single mom already struggling to make ends meet. What chaps my hide is the celebrities who are for all of this environmental crap ( Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins ) can afford the screw ups of the government. It's always poor people who are the victims of environmental policies.

Not to mention, they will always blame someone else for their mistakes. In Cuba, it's America's fault that communism do not work. If everyone thought the way they do, socialism/communism would work. What's funny is that conservatism works 90 percent of the time when it comes to economic growth. Key phase is ECONOMIC GROWTH. That's a liberals main enemy. Why do you think global warming is such an issue? You think its because the Earth is dying, REALLY? How about all the companies that go out their way to show that they are "green", or at least developing cleaner products? It's not about private business at ALL. They rather have a ruin economy, and control over the American people instead of a successful country. Time and time again its been proven...

 

[Lamarr]

So does this mean Obama is going to still go forward even though its going to cost us billions?

Of course, he already said that! I've already come to the conclusion that this climate issue is just a mechanism to restrict people's activities, or they will tax you. If you think about it, the corporations don't care, they just pass the cost along to the consumer. Also, businesses leave the US because of these regulatory practices. The auto industry suffers from these practices.

If a 'green' economy is the future, let it come from the private sector. People embrace Capitalism because it represents freedom, that is the only answer.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[actinanass]

There is a saying, its not the mountain ahead that wears you down; its the little grains of sand that get into your shoes before you get to the mountain that does the damage.

Said differently, sometimes its not the bold statements one makes that points out one's bias; its the silly little comments one makes when there was no real reason to make them, that makes it clear.

QueEx

The difference between you and me que is that I admit that I'm bias...

 

[QueEx]

Are you saying China is embracing Capitalism while those on the left are in opposition to Industry? I thought China was a communist country

hell they more conservative than Obama....

There is a saying, its not the mountain ahead that wears you down; its the little grains of sand that get into your shoes before you get to the mountain that does the damage.

Said differently, sometimes its not the bold statements one makes that point out one's bias; its the silly little comments one makes when there was no real reason to make them, that makes it clear.

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

The difference between you and me que is that I admit that I'm bias...

LOL

There are MAJOR differences between you and I; but I'm happy to see you admit your bias -- just remember not to try to pretend that you're "Objective", again.

QueEx

 

[thoughtone]

The difference between you and me que is that I admit that I'm bias...

And that proves what?

 

[actinanass]

LOL

There are MAJOR differences between you and I; but I'm happy to see you admit your bias -- just remember not to try to pretend that you're "Objective", again.

QueEx

Being "Objective" means I can admit if one side is right on an issue, and my side is wrong on an issue. I have proven that I can see both sides of the argument. However, what you fail to realize is that when I see bullshit being spewed, I will attack it.

Que, you can look everything I've posted, up front and center. With Sotomayor, I said that it was a good pick for Obama. THATS NOT ME BEING BIAS. Me being bias is when Thought, or even you sometimes would post an article that I totally disagree with. Like the school voucher thing *I believe gunner posted that*. I totally disagree with Obama's position on school vouchers. Yet, no one attack my premise. Instead, ya'll bring up something that has NOTHING to do with the subject. Proving that my stance on that issue was the correct stance. Why am I saying that? Well, if YOU was objective, Que, you would of demanded everyone to stay on subject. Instead, you put gasoline on the fire.

Honestly, to me, being objective is really overrated. I mean seriously, can you honest to God tell me that MSNBC is an objective source of news? If so, I can say the same thing about Fox News. See what I'm talking about?

 

[actinanass]

And that proves what?

well, you the smart one...

 

[QueEx]

Being "Objective" means I can admit if one side is right on an issue, and my side is wrong on an issue.

Whoooaa.

How can you come back now -- after just telling us you are biased -- and try to tell us how objective you are ???

That tells me now that not only are you biased but a liar, if not just inconsistent, as well.

QueEx

 

[thoughtone]

Being "Objective" means I can admit if one side is right on an issue,

objective:

expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

bias:

an inclination of temperament or outlook ; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice

 

[thoughtone]

Whoooaa.

How can you come back now -- after just telling us you are biased -- and try to tell us how objective you are ???

That tells me now that not only are you biased but a liar, if not just inconsistent, as well.

QueEx

...or haven’t received this week's RNC talking points email!

 

[Lamarr]

I'm learning more everyday! The tactics of diversion are unparallel. I don't understand how some of ya'll can debate an issue with a clear conscience.

The political thread at BGOL is Amazin!

 

[thoughtone]

I'm learning more everyday! The tactics of diversion are unparallel. I don't understand how some of ya'll can debate an issue with a clear conscience.

The political thread at BGOL is Amazin!

Is that what you learned at Hannity's blog?:LOL:

 

[thoughtone]

I'm learning more everyday! The tactics of diversion are unparallel. I don't understand how some of ya'll can debate an issue with a clear conscience.

The political thread at BGOL is Amazin!

Is that what you learned at Hannity's blog?

 

[Lamarr]

Is that what you learned at Hannity's blog?

there U go I told you I got banned twice for spewing my anti-war/conservative dialog. I just can't buy in to the Nazi (National Socialist) propanganda.

 

[Gunner]

Is that what you learned at Hannity's blog?

Coming from someone who doesn't post unless it's from Huffington Post. They do post daily talking points. You use them in every other post and present their articles as absolute.

 

[actinanass]

Whoooaa.

How can you come back now -- after just telling us you are biased -- and try to tell us how objective you are ???

That tells me now that not only are you biased but a liar, if not just inconsistent, as well.

QueEx

dude everyone has a little bias in them.

Again, are you going to tell me that MSNBC isn't bias? If so, I can say the same thing about Fox News.

 

[actinanass]

Coming from someone who doesn't post unless it's from Huffington Post. They do post daily talking points. You use them in every other post and present their articles as absolute.

Not to mention, anyone who disagrees with their premise, they instantaneously lose credibility.

like me....

 

[QueEx]

dude everyone has a little bias in them.

Again, are you going to tell me that MSNBC isn't bias? If so, I can say the same thing about Fox News.

Excuse me; where in the fuck did I mention MSNBC being anything ??? Please point it out.

QueEx

 

[Chitownheadbusa]

lol@the Earth NEEDING a climate change via human involvement.
lol@taxes being one of the solutions.

 

[actinanass]

Excuse me; where in the fuck did I mention MSNBC being anything ??? Please point it out.

QueEx

You not understanding the point I was making.

I was using two cable news station to make the point that nothing is truly objective. Everyone has a little bias in them. If you was truly middle of the road like you say you are, then you would only moderate, not participate in the debate. You would post articles from both sides *even the hated Rush Limbaugh*. In fact, you wouldn't have anything against him, because you suppose to be objective. Yet, you do the exact opposite. It's ok if you are a little bias, its only human...

 

[thoughtone]

You not understanding the point I was making.

I was using two cable news station to make the point that nothing is truly objective. Everyone has a little bias in them. If you was truly middle of the road like you say you are, then you would only moderate, not participate in the debate. You would post articles from both sides *even the hated Rush Limbaugh*. In fact, you wouldn't have anything against him, because you suppose to be objective. Yet, you do the exact opposite. It's ok if you are a little bias, its only human...

 

[actinanass]

every time you post, I think of the pussies in the world...

 

[thoughtone]

every time you post, I think of the pussies in the world...

Now I know you are under 17. Get off this board you minor!

 

[TheDynasty]

Yay for China!