Watch Live: President Trump announces his decision on the Paris Climate Accord

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Indigo5

Thanks for completely ignoring the fact that other nations with expensive safety nets rank below us

Thanks for ignoring that I answered those questions?

WHICH countries are you referring to and what safety nets do they provide and for how long?

Syria provides virtually free college...But you might want to consider other factors at present.

You want to claim something contrary to the consensus of economists, studies and data..then get specific..

What countries have free healthcare and education, but have slower GDP growth that you are referring to?

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Indigo5

Sorry you don't like the data and are trying to spin it but it's pretty clear.

For eff sake...you haven't provided that..

Give me a specific country example that you think is similar to the USA...but provides free college...that has slower GDP growth?

a reply to: Indigo5

You can post all the articles you want theorizing, the fact of the matter is the real world data shows that there are plenty of countries who do the things you want us to do and are still less prosperous than the US, both in total GDP and GDP per capita. Go ahead and post some more spin, still won't change it.

a reply to: face23785

denial

a reply to: veracity

Oh ok, because there's not a bunch of countries with more social programs than us lower on that list. You're the only one with denial here. Numbers are numbers, cry all you want they don't look like what you thought they would.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: veracity

Oh ok, because there's not a bunch of countries with more social programs than us lower on that list.

Cite them and explain what they provide, how long they have done so, what their GDP growth is..

Cuz real researchers have conducted multiple in depth studies that disagree with your "bunch of countries" argument.

I have posted links to the same.

Once nothing happens with the climate melting people will whine over money wasted and China pollution getting worse.
Only way possible for this to might work is all cars in the future to run from computers.Then that will cause massive problems.

a reply to: Indigo5

I don't have to name them. Look at the list. The US is 17th on the list. In order for your position to be true, there could only be 16 countries on the planet that have social safety net programs for any meaningful period of time. That's obviously not true, therefore my point stands. There are countries below us on the list that have the programs you assert lead to a more prosperous nation. Period. I know you can understand this, it's very simple. Open your mind. The issue is more complicated than you asserted, and socialist programs aren't the answer or the US would be a lot lower than 17th.

originally posted by: face23785
Really? Because a lot of the countries you're talking about are below us on this list A few are higher, but a bunch are below too. If that was the model for success shouldn't they all be higher than us? Sounds like it's more complicated than you think.

That list is GDP per capita, the data you want to be looking at is purchasing power. Also, you have to account for services provided by the government. For example, in the US you're going to be liable for a multi million dollar illness on your 50k in income, while in another nation your health care costs are taken care of through taxes on those still working.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: face23785
Really? Because a lot of the countries you're talking about are below us on this list A few are higher, but a bunch are below too. If that was the model for success shouldn't they all be higher than us? Sounds like it's more complicated than you think.

That list is GDP per capita, the data you want to be looking at is purchasing power.

You are correct, but I think he has begun with a premise and isn't open to contrary logic or data.
Cost of Living in the US is fundamentally different.
GDP per capita is tethered to productivity, not pay, nor accounts for cost of living. What Americans pay for healthcare and education annually...let alone gas, food, etc.

But again...how much time do you want to spend in a flat earth debate.

originally posted by: MysticPearl
a reply to: Indigo5

You also present the asinine assumption that opting out of the Paris Agreement means we won't be doing anything for the environment going forward.

Of course we will continue protecting the air and water and developing alternative energy to oil.

We just wont be doing much of it in the next couple years with a Science-Deniers in both the Whitehouse and EPA.

We are backsliding with these morons.

The rest of the world is signing agreements not just around Climate, but energy, technology and infrastructure deals.

We no longer have a seat at that table.

That is why CEOs near unanimously called Trump's move damaging to the US economy..Hell even Exxon thought it was insanely moronic.

Meanwhile Pruitt is stripping back environmental regulations meant to protect water and air..

It's not about helping "The Planet"...it is about helping "US Citizens" live on the planet...Trump is hurting the US Economically, environmentally and health wise..Those things have real-world costs.

Meanwhile Investment Capital in around alternative energy in the US evaporates...Foreign Nations wont deal with non-accord nations on energy deals..China and Russia gleefully stepping up as Leaders in the world.

a reply to: Indigo5

Meanwhile Investment Capital in around alternative energy in the US evaporates...Foreign Nations wont deal with non-accord nations on energy deals..China and Russia gleefully stepping up as Leaders in the world.

I always wonder why, if there’s so much money to be made, it takes taxpayer subsidies and trillions in destroyed value to get it going. Would it not be viable as a stand-alone investment now if there’s money to be made?

This is like the broken window fallacy — think of all the employment that would result if teams of people drove around every city with air-powered golf ball launchers breaking hundreds of thousands or millions of windows every night. Why, the economy would boom, right?

And why stop there? While the teams are out breaking windows, they should set fire to every parked car they see. Think of the boom in employment in firefighters and tow-truck drivers as well as the billions that would be spent on new cars that could bring about.

But why even stop there? Think of the construction boom if they burned every house!

We’d be a hugely wealthy nation, so rich that NOBODY would have to work.

I think the government should get right on it.

originally posted by: proximo
You do not have the slightest understanding of economics. Every dollar you increase taxes by you take money out of the economy, tax at a high enough rate and you will take in less money despite a higher rate.

That would depend on where we are on a Laffer Curve. Considering most of the world pays a higher rate than we do, it would suggest we have a ways to go so more taxes would lead to more revenue.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Indigo5

Meanwhile Investment Capital in around alternative energy in the US evaporates...Foreign Nations wont deal with non-accord nations on energy deals..China and Russia gleefully stepping up as Leaders in the world.

I always wonder why, if there’s so much money to be made, it takes taxpayer subsidies and trillions in destroyed value to get it going. Would it not be viable as a stand-alone investment now if there’s money to be made?

.

Because it is an international market for alternative energy and Trump just gave away a seat at the table.

US firms will be at a disadvantage internationally not being a member of the Paris Accord. The Paris accord fosters trade and business in the space.

Having uphill battles to sell technology internationally US investment in alternative energy technology will evaporate.

This is why China is so ridiculously happy with Trumps move. They are already doing blitz to fill the void. the US exit represents Trillions to them over the coming years.

originally posted by: D8Tee
I always wonder why, if there’s so much money to be made, it takes taxpayer subsidies and trillions in destroyed value to get it going. Would it not be viable as a stand-alone investment now if there’s money to be made?

No. For the same reason space requires government grants. The infrastructure required, not to mention the R&D costs to make a viable product are simply beyond what the market can raise on it's own.

It's one of the big flaws of capitalism. You can only invest as much as the investor class is willing to spend. Planned economies can devote trillions where the market can generally only deliver a few billion.

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: veracity
Everyone excited about seeing our emissions increase?

Good thing we can get back in after 4 years, he is such a wasteful president, mirrors the waste he is himself.

Whats the Paris Agreement do that you like it so much?

What about the environment and our Earth do you hate so much that you dont want to protect it?

or, do you believe global warming is a hoax...thats it, stupidity taking over our country

Look - here is a fact you lefties don't seem to grasp.

Here is a fact you "right wingers" don't seem to grasp..

EVERYWHERE else on planet earth, climate change is not a "lefty" "Right Winger" debate...It is KNOWN SCIENCE...

The right wing have embraced a pseudo religion meets industry propaganda campaign.

It is bizarre to see people dismiss math and science as a political view in 2017.

The rest of the world is fundamentally stumped how a chunk of Americans can be so gullibly stupid.

originally posted by: Indigo5

The rest of the world is fundamentally stumped how a chunk of Americans can be so gullibly stupid.

Right winger Americans are 'specialists'. They don't need general knowledge to survive if they can rebuild an engine or weld on an oil rig. Unless the commie Dems try to take their jobs with Solar Power and gay electric batteries.

The sad truth is they will all be replaced with Robots. # them and they know it, is the future they can't escape and why they're thrashing about.

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Aazadan
Revenue is easy, tax more.

You do not have the slightest understanding of economics. Every dollar you increase taxes by you take money out of the economy.

Wow...Ok...

Every dollar the Fed collects it spends. It is returned to the economy. It is not a business. If it was then it would have a profit motive (decrease services and spending and increase taxes). Instead it is a through vehicle to get things done on a national scale...defense, roads, bridges, services...greater economic interests of the country as a whole.

The speed at which it is returned into consumer's pockets depends on the mechanism or how it is spent.

Ironically the quickest return to the economy is safety nets. Give a poor person food stamps...they are going to spend that money immediately to eat.

Give a millionaire a huge tax break? They likely will save or invest in an exotic way that doesn't return to circulation. They will make more money from having that money...basically growing wealth by sitting on the extra money.

It is silly that you feel comfortable telling someone that they don't understand economics...

How about these guys?

President Donald Trump faces some unlikely opposition to the idea of pulling the U.S. out of the 2015 Paris climate accord: Exxon Mobil Corp. and ConocoPhillips, two of the world’s biggest oil producers.

www.bloomberg.com...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: veracity
Everyone excited about seeing our emissions increase?

Good thing we can get back in after 4 years, he is such a wasteful president, mirrors the waste he is himself.

Whats the Paris Agreement do that you like it so much?

What about the environment and our Earth do you hate so much that you dont want to protect it?

or, do you believe global warming is a hoax...thats it, stupidity taking over our country

Look - here is a fact you lefties don't seem to grasp.

Here is a fact you "right wingers" don't seem to grasp..

EVERYWHERE else on planet earth, climate change is not a "lefty" "Right Winger" debate...It is KNOWN SCIENCE...

The right wing have embraced a pseudo religion meets industry propaganda campaign.

It is bizarre to see people dismiss math and science as a political view in 2017.

The rest of the world is fundamentally stumped how a chunk of Americans can be so gullibly stupid.

Here is what those seizing on the withdrawal from the Paris agreement don't understand - the agreement offered almost no benefit to global temperature reductions. It seems a wider argument is being used to try and pin the end of the world on one man based on one unsanctioned deal. Utterly nonsensical, but alas, it hasn't stopped some from the hysteria.