English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

We were talking about this in class tonight -how the US and Australia are the major holdouts -and I really wonder what is the reasoning for our hesitation. Any imput would be appreciated, even links to resources about this. Thanks!

2007-01-17 13:45:24 · 6 answers · asked by justme 3 in Politics & Government Politics

6 answers

The bottomline to this question is two things:
1. He believes it will cost too much for American corporations.
2. He is owned by American corporations therefore since they do not to spend the money for the changes, he will not sign.

2007-01-17 14:34:57 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0 0

When the U.S. is one of the largest polluters in the world, and with the millions of cars on its roads compared to some countries, why on earth, would the US sign something, and then have to actually do something about it? Why not just make sure the American public pays more attention to the "war"....It's much better to keep sending US soldiers overseas to die for something they don't even believe in anymore. Wouldn't want people to actually know that the U.S. doesn't really care about the environment. Global warming as a hot topic in 2007? That was well written about 20 years ago....why the hot topic now?

2007-01-17 13:57:44 · answer #2 · answered by nerdy girl 4 · 0 2

Because it's a joke. In order sign to it you have to join their club and pay dues like the U.N. that we already support by giving the most money to. Google it there are a few more countries that are exempt from the so called treaty. Besides America is doing it's part even though I don't think global warming is only caused by man. Even when pressured Al Gore had to admit his shrieking about us killing the earth is only a theory.

2007-01-17 13:59:42 · answer #3 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 0 1

For the same reasons that Clinton didn't submit the treaty to the Senate.
1) The senate would reject them soundly.
2) They would be very bad for the US.

2007-01-17 14:22:41 · answer #4 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0 0

Because it is a bunch of socialist junk.

2007-01-17 14:23:40 · answer #5 · answered by Ethan M 5 · 0 0

Because it won't reduce CO2 emissions, but just force you and me to pay poor countries for the right to do it.

2007-01-17 13:50:52 · answer #6 · answered by Evita Rodham Clinton 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers