U.S. says it won't accept any new 'constraints' at Kyoto talks

[CHIMO]

MONTREAL (CP) - Just ahead of the UN conference on global warming, a senior American official said Saturday that Washington would hold to its position that any new measures to protect the environment not limit economic development.

However, the U.S. Consul General in Quebec City, Abigail Friedman, said her country was often miscast as the bad guy for refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.

The United States has been promoting free-market partnerships to replace Kyoto when it expires in 2013. The move would end pollution caps once the protocol expires.

Canada is reportedly making moves to join the plan.

http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/politics/news/shownews.jsp?content=n112617A

[FormerRepublican]

1. I wonder what they'll say when global environmental collapse...

...creates constraints?

What will the Bushies do if environmental contamination offs us all and no one is left to buy their crap and pay off Halliburton with obscene profits?

[stepnw1f]

3. The Money They Hope to Profit

will mean nothing where they are headed.

[nosmokes]

2. why are we even bothering to show up? with such a

stance as we ain't changing nuttin that's gonna cost us a red penny, WTF's the point? we'd do more for the environment by not burning the fuel to go there...

[rfkrfk]

12. the US is obligated by treaty to attend

the treaty is the UNFCCC,
United Nations Framework convention on climate change,
Kyoto is a followon to the UNFCCC

[wtmusic]

4. What is bullshit about the US "plan"

"Washington, she said, was focused on making existing technologies more efficient and less polluting, as well as encouraging businesses to decrease their greenhouse gas emissions through incentives."

We can make guns less deadly and encourage murderers not to kill. We can give them, say, a tax break every year they don't give in to the urge.

Or we can just make it illegal, and let them deal with it. Isn't that the Republican way -- personal responsibility, and all that crap?

Abigail Friedman and her administration have their heads up their asses.

[DRoseDARs]

5. We won't accept "news" ones? When did we accept the old ones?

Huh? :shrug:

[bemildred]

8. A good question. I thought we already pooped on Kyoto. nt

[depakid]

6. The rest of the world might as well go ahead without the US

It's absolutely a waste of time to even try to engage Republicans.

All it will do is detract from or impede any real progress- and you can't make any agreements with these people anyway, because they won't keep them.

Even with the recent evidence that the Montreal Accords have reverse the trend on Ozone depletion, the US is still intent on violating it:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/13269666.htm

[MaineYooper]

7. in other words, this administration places no value on climate protection

This administration (and the people who bankroll it) has demonstrated repeatedly that the only way it demonstrates value is monetarily.

If they are unwilling to bear even the risk of financial hit to protect the environment, then it has no value to them. QED

[Triana]

9. two words:

BIG PIG...

'cause that's what we are and that's what we look like to the world.

[OneBlueSky]

10. the two words I'd choose for George are "F*ck You" . . . n/t

.

[pinniped]

11. The US is still a developing country, I see.

Better hold off all Kyoto talks until the POS* is gone, or eliminate the US all together.

[DeepModem Mom]

13. As evidence piles up, as the effect of global warming can be seen...

with the naked eye, as our weather turns into a maelstrom -- profit is still the only consideration for the Bush cabal. May they all, some day, somehow, pay for this iniquity of greed.

[gratuitous]

14. Translation: Won't accept any new "constraints"

Means "we're not going to play." Which means that when the new rules are instituted, the United States won't have any say in them, only a stubborn refusal to cooperate in the community of nations to protect a planet we all share.

What would you say to a homeowner who refuses to cut his lawn or paint his house or who leaves junker cars all over his property? A homeowner says that all of these maintenance items cost money, and he needs his money to . . . well, whatever? Sooner or later, the city he lives in will clean up his property without his permission or say-so, and charge him for the effort.

[Toots]

15. Canada is reportedly making moves to join the plan.

What plan is that, The US plan of free-market without polution caps or the new Kyoto measures being introduced? :shrug:

[CHIMO]

16. That's My Take

On that sentence.

I guess we will see more from the meeting. However, Alberta is backing the US plan and the federal government can't do everything.

So we can only wait and see. In addition there should be an election campaign starting in Canada this evening.