Jump to content


Pres. Obama and Jinping strike deal on carbon emissions


Recommended Posts

And once again, it's entirely possible for the US to improve the job sector domestically while reducing emissions. Fox News, whether you watch them or not, wants people to believe it's not possible and the country will implode if we continue to reduce emissions. False, not to metnion retarded. China is taking a major step and it's a huge deal. Our competitiveness with China is more dependent on other things than whether we're working to further reduce emissions by 2030.

Link to comment

 

 

How are middle class jobs tied to emissions? Even if China cut their emissions to nothing and we didn't, they'd still be getting exported jobs because of labor costs.

That's why both need to be addressed.

 

 

They're separate issues. Tying them together makes utterly no sense, and China has no reason to change their wages laws even if we did.

 

This whole thing is a red herring. I can't even imagine how the two got connected.

 

I don't believe I was the one that connected them.

Link to comment

And once again, it's entirely possible for the US to improve the job sector domestically while reducing emissions. Fox News, whether you watch them or not, wants people to believe it's not possible and the country will implode if we continue to reduce emissions. False, not to metnion retarded. China is taking a major step and it's a huge deal. Our competitiveness with China is more dependent on other things than whether we're working to further reduce emissions by 2030.

Where did I say anything of the sort?

 

Look, I have said that it's a good thing they are at the table talking. I'm sorry if I'm not jumping up and down all giddy and praising Father Obama for great historical accomplishments over this. To this point, China hasn't even reduced ANYTHING. For all we know, they could tell us to go pound sand a month from now.

 

But, hey....if you want to get all worked up about it....it's your prerogative.

 

Fox News has nothing to do with this thread. If that's all you have to fall back on, then, I guess I don't have anything else for you.

Link to comment

 

i guess f#*k middle class jobs till then.

 

Pretty sure you connected them right there.

 

No, I didn't. The entire "wage" discussion started because Carl actually asked what I thought was the bigger issue. Carl and I were actually having a nice conversation about it until you got your panties in a wad claiming I said something I didn't.

Link to comment

 

 

 

How are middle class jobs tied to emissions? Even if China cut their emissions to nothing and we didn't, they'd still be getting exported jobs because of labor costs.

That's why both need to be addressed.

 

 

They're separate issues. Tying them together makes utterly no sense, and China has no reason to change their wages laws even if we did.

 

This whole thing is a red herring. I can't even imagine how the two got connected.

 

I don't believe I was the one that connected them.

 

 

You were. Tenth post in this thread is the first to bring jobs into the discussion.

Link to comment

Let me break down what your post said in context.

 

I said we're reducing emissions because we're in a position to, and while China is only capping emission by 2030 because that's what is realistically possible. You said f#*k middle class jobs until then (2030). This implies that our reduction of emissions will screw middle class jobs here while China continues unhindered growth. Neither of those are true.

Link to comment

Let me break down what your post said in context.

 

I said we're reducing emissions because we're in a position to, and while China is only capping emission by 2030 because that's what is realistically possible. You said f#*k middle class jobs until then (2030). This implies that our reduction of emissions will screw middle class jobs here while China continues unhindered growth. Neither of those are true.

Where did I mention wages in that?

Link to comment

Ebyl, you make good points but you're the angriest sounding guy I know. :lol:

 

Man I would not trust anything China says. Their record of not being truthful about anything related to their production is quite consistent. In that they're always being deceitful.

This is true, but you have to have agreements, right?

 

I expect their government will be no less weasely in their attempts to circumvent the law than companies here are and have always been with regard to any regulation. Only the state/company barrier is a little hazy over there.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

 

 

 

 

How are middle class jobs tied to emissions? Even if China cut their emissions to nothing and we didn't, they'd still be getting exported jobs because of labor costs.

That's why both need to be addressed.

 

 

They're separate issues. Tying them together makes utterly no sense, and China has no reason to change their wages laws even if we did.

 

This whole thing is a red herring. I can't even imagine how the two got connected.

 

I don't believe I was the one that connected them.

 

 

You were. Tenth post in this thread is the first to bring jobs into the discussion.

 

I was talking about environmental regulations causing job loss in the US due to other countries not giving a crap.

 

Wages are a completely different part of the job problem. Carl asked me which was a bigger problem and he and I have been discussing it since.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...