Okay - Obama wants to up the ante on stopping global warming. Yet China pumps out an epic amount of air pollution, with zero regard for filtration or environmental damage. So what good would it do to decrease our "carbon footprint" when other countries don't give a shit, and will continue to not give a shit. What kind of a leader tells his own people to change their evil ways, yet encourage other nations to proceed full speed ahead with whatever it takes to grow their economy? Please explain, and remember - I'm-just-a-caveman!
Because other countries will tell us to suck a boner, and we will. Doesn't China hold a lot of our debt? That might be some serious leverage in my book. Just sayin'. Also, aren't libs and lefties all about "sticking it to the man?" America is, in effect, "the man" in many ways, so telling us to pound sand would only endear them to us.
Kind of hypocritical for us to tell other nations to clean up their shit, when we can't be bothered to do anything about our own shit.
China needs markets for its products. The U.S. is 17% of that market share. No. Granted, but as part of a global consortium, we can have considerable influence, IMO.
China also has a questionable human rights record and is undemocratic. Should America not "give a shit" about human rights and democracy because other countries don't? Where would that put America's self promoted superiority? If you want to claim moral superiority over the rest of the world then sometimes you need to set an example.
So the "right thing to do" will be to limit our countries growth and encourage other countries to do whatever they want by continuing to buy their poison drywall/dog-food/kids toys. Got it!
We could start with not shipping more coal to china. http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-...sk-for-statewide-review-of-coal-train-impacts If Canada wants to fuck up their rail traffic, cities, and any roads near the rail lines and ports let them.
You proceed from a false premise, assuming that they only way to curb emissions is by limiting growth. Its not. Encouraging corporations (through things like tax credits and other government incentives) to switch more efficient vehicles and processes will not only lower emissions, but will also increase growth. If it costs a company less to produce goods/services, they will have higher profits (even if they don't lower their prices). Additionally, if companies convert their vehicles over to cleaner burning natural gas, not only does this lower emissions, but since the US is home to some of the largest NG deposits in the world, it creates growth and jobs, as more NG is extracted. Not to mention, we send less money over to people who hate us. Us shipping coal to China is a very good idea. Chinese coal is some of the nastiest coal on Earth, even the dirtiest coal in the US is cleaner than most Chinese coal. I know a power plant engineer who has done a lot of work in China, including studies of Chinese coal mines. The stuff that comes out of the ground there is barely solid and puts out several orders of magnitudes of more pollutants than our stuff. Chinese coal mines are also very dangerous to work in, with more people dying in Chinese coal mines in a day, than we lose in coal mines all year. (There's also the fact that the Chinese don't take steps to prevent things like black lung disease and other health risks associated with mining, like we do here in the US, so they have even more fatalities associated with mining than us.)
It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant. That's the answer to every global warming/climate change/temperature adjustment/whatever name they fucking give this scam next question. It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.
Quit trolling. We can have cleaner air regardless of what China does. Unless you like dirty air. In which case, you're free to move to China and take a deep breath. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant. It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.] [/b][/i]It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.[/b][/i] Are you picking up on this yet? Huh? size=9][/b][/i]It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.[/b][/i][/size]
It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant. It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.] [/b][/i]It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.[/b][/i] Are you picking up on this yet? Huh? [/b][/i]It's a hoax intended to compel you to live like a third-world peasant.[/b][/i]
1. Somebody has to start 2. China is (surprisingly) working on it. They are furiously expanding their high-speed railway system as well as planning green cities. But you're right, they are still pumping out shit like no one else. However, that will change when the west realizes that its industrial base is better off at home.
And who exactly, pray tell, would profit from that? Logic. You're about as good at it as you are at formatting text on an internet bulletin board. But I'm sure a little embarassment is nothing compared to the ten cents per stupid party line the Tea Party nuts are paying.
Again, not a college type so someone edumicate me here: doesn't air circulate all around the globe? Thus wouldn't another country pumping shit into the air affect everyone? It's like the "no smoking" section of restaurants back in the day. The smoke still wafted over from smoker's tables.
There is an indirect impact, things like the ozone hole, higher mercury levels in fish, etc. But when it comes to breathable air, that is a phenomenon local to the emissions source. The pollutants disperse in the atmosphere, rather than blowing across the ocean to Seattle. So, to answer your question, Chinese pollution is harmful to us. It is less harmful than our own pollution. We can do something about the latter, even if nothing happens with the former.
*siiiigh* [YT="Every global warming thread ever"]6lHgbbM9pu4[/YT] There, do we have it out of our systems yet?
You are generalising about "other countries" in a way that is quite unjustified. Most are doing more than the US on tackling global warming. There is very little leverage either way in the debt situation between China and the US. Firstly, and contrary to popular belief, China holds quite small proportion. Secondly, the worst they can do is to sell it on. But any damage that might inflict would also hurt them, given the symbiotic relationship that exists.
INEVITABLY and UNAVOIDABLY, the Sun WILL overheat the Earth, as its hydrogen is used up. Earth's inevitable FATE is to be like Venus.
Very true, but the thread made me think about Earth's INEVITABLE fate at the hands of our Sun as it dies, is dying.
