Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Gopher]

How did you conclude that Britain is doing "very well" on Kyoto other than "we've signed up after[]all?"

And no I will not respond to your rapid-fire prosecutor routine. We are still talking about Kyoto, remember?

[BS.Dos.]

Stay in the present Gopher and let's talk about anti-Americanism.

[BS.Dos.]

We've put pen to paper. We acknowledge the problem. We understand the gravity of the situation. We appreciate the global concern. We subscribe to the notion.

[Gopher]

That is all talk. Now let us talk about "the problem" in all its dimensions, including its origins.

Who invented modern capitalism and forced "the rest of the world" to accept it via their gunships? Why are there environmental problems, especially massive deforestation, in places like Brazil's Atlantic coast? And who exactly began systematically deforesting South Asia, especially Burma? And how many unmitigated famines did you people inflict onto "the rest of the world?" Do you think I stumbled around and cited Lord Lytton randomly?

Finally, how did you conclude that Britain is doing "very well" on Kyoto other than "we've signed up after[]all?" What specific performance indicators can you cite?

[mises]

[BS.Dos.]

Can you imagine, for a second, what kind of message it would send around the world if America signed up to Kyoto? Think about it, for a second. How hard can it really be? It's a hard decision for everyone else, most of whom stand to lose a lot more than the US, but still they've signed.

[mises]

[Pluto]

[spliff]

This today. CNN If u were president would u move the American embassy to Jerusalem?

McCain: Yes the minute I'm in office I WILL move the Embassy.
Obamma: Well this is something we'll have to work into. Blah blah blah (read: who the hell knows)

Myself, I always prefer a stand of commitment one way or the other than Political jargon.

Seems to me Obamma is big on posturing and saying what he thinks will be popular and not going w/ his convictions....or says something that doesn't say anything at all. I don't like that. McCain is quite the opposite and he doesn't seem afraid to avoid alienating voters for political gains. I like that.

[Gopher]

[Beej]

Europe is is run by a very small elite class. The European press is in step with this elite class. There is a huge disconnect between the rulers and the average EU citizen in such areas as the death penalty and "deeper integration"

[catman]

Obama is avoiding the Euro press because they are more challenging than the US media. In particular his move to the center during the political campaign.

Anyways Obama wants to get more Euro troops in Afghanistan. He will probably fail but he has a better chance of convincing them than McCain. If McCain is elected he will also be going to Europe to try and drumb up support for bombing Iran.

[Gopher]

[Tiger Beer]

[BS.Dos.]

I don't think it's fair to suggest that none of the countries who've signed up to Kyoto have no intention of honoring their commitments to it. Take a look at the results for Europe overall in respect of the EU ETS. True, it's had a shaky start and the results have been far from encouraging, but there are always 'teething' troubles when big initiatives like this come on-line. Big swathes of industry need to time to adapt. Complex carbon trading mechanisms need to be instilled and adopted as a matter of corporate practice. This takes time. The industrial juggernaut that has given rise to global GHGs cannot be expected to suddenly stop. It needs to slow before we can even begin to think about switching it into reverse.

Likewise, it would also be naive to imagine that the Kyoto protocol will instantly produce positive quantifiable results. For exactly the same reasons, signing up, for most countries at least, has been the relatively easy part. As is so often the case, the devil here is well and truly in the detail. Adoption, implementation and commitment are the nuts and bolts of the Kyoto protocol, the assembly of which requires considerable effort and resources and, more importantly, patience. Kyoto therefore shouldn't be viewed as a simple short-term solution. Its effectiveness can only be applauded or ridiculed over a longer time frame. Critics have every right to question Kyoto's perceived weaknesses on the grounds that they believe it's simply a symbolic gesture and one which will have no bearing on realizing its central aims. Such criticism however, cannot offer any absolutes in respect of any perceived failings. Critics cannot argue categorically that the Kyoto protocol will fail. The only absolutes we can be sure of are that it will never succeed completely unless we all agree to it.

The symbolic nature of ratifying Kyoto should not be under estimated. More than simply signing up to something that may or may not harm national economies, Kyoto represents a starting point from which we are, for the first time in history, in complete and unanimous agreement and is something that should not be underestimated. I can fully appreciate US concerns over the damage Kyoto could do to its economy. However, the damage caused through not changing our irresponsible global industrial practices could be far more costly. Personally, it's this failure at the highest level to address this irresponsibility that I find so upsetting.

Ultimately, Kyoto seeks to uphold the view that no one country should continue to pollute indefinitely without incurring a duty to compensate for doing so. A considerable number of countries are in agreement on this and are taking measures to address it.