Why Business Opposes Trump’s Retreat From Paris Climate Pact

[moe]

How naive and stupid you are. India says they will need $2.5T in new technology and financial assistance. Where is that going to come from? They rightfully claim that the U.S. got rich on cheap abundant fossil fuels and now we want them to use far more expensive energy. They want compensated. It is natural.

The truly sad part is that you did not know this. So uninformed.

I've already explained this to you, try reading up on the subject matter so as not to look so foolish.

 

[WVPATX]

I've already explained this to you, try reading up on the subject matter so as not to look so foolish.

As is normal, you reasoning leaves a great deal to be desired. India wants money, big time money. And they have made that abundantly clear to everyone before joining the non-binding accord.

 

[TarHeelEer]

I guess you think that USD 100 billion means the U.S. pays $100B. The excerpt from the agreement you posted describes a goal of raising 100 billion U.S. dollars (how it will be measured) and see "jointly providing" which means accumulative (from all involved).

Who pays for the UN? Who pays for NATO? Who will pay for this pledge?

 

[moe]

Who pays for the UN? Who pays for NATO? Who will pay for this pledge?

Google is your best choice.

 

[Keyser76]

Are we supposed to argue with these buffoons that business didn't oppose the withdrawal? I mean, PATX debates are amusing but it is a FACT that most CEOs, including EXXON/Mobiles were against it. Let the fools spin away.

 

[WVPATX]

Are we supposed to argue with these buffoons that business didn't oppose the withdrawal? I mean, PATX debates are amusing but it is a FACT that most CEOs, including EXXON/Mobiles were against it. Let the fools spin away.

Provide a link that shows most CEO's were against withdrawal? And remember, some CEO's would greatly benefit from out staying in the Accord.

 

[TarHeelEer]

Google is your best choice.

It was rhetorical.