2007-02-20 07:44:08 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bad things. That's why neither Bill Clinton or George Bush have signed it. I've also heard that the countries that did sign it havn't met its standards, so what's the point? Especially when China would ignore it and get even more manufacturing companies to move there taking the jobs with them.
2007-02-20 07:52:03 · answer #1 · answered by Sean 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
So many industrialized countries (i.e.) our main competitors, have signed Kyoto that it won't have too detrimental of an economic impact. In fact, it is likely that the development of green technology is going to spur an entirely new economy and boom. Finally, without the world, there is no economy.
2007-02-20 07:49:26 · answer #2 · answered by Tara P 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Allow us all to see another day of it...
Yes - it would be financially tough on America... that is why Bush refused to sign it....
However - consider that the only reason it is tough on America is because we have never taken the proper steps toward protecting the worlds environment... all the money we make runs on oil...
If we change things now - it will be tougher but it will protect us all in the future.
I say suck it up and sign the damn treaty.
(And just for the record - China did sign it... the usa and Australia are the only two that didn't....)
2007-02-20 08:23:30 · answer #3 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nothing. Except to reduce global warming and green house gases.
And the bottom line of those who are in the business of polluting our air and the environment.
See, that's what Bush hates. He's more business friendly than he is environmental.
Just like Daddy. :0)
Both choose profit over the health of anything environmentally "sound".
Makes me wonder if they've made air filters out of money yet?
Just roll up a couple Ben Franklins and tape them over your mouth...
2007-02-20 12:01:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If China and India don't abide by it America will be third in the economic world but it won't matter since we'll all be dead from their pollution.
2007-02-20 07:51:51 · answer #5 · answered by Rja 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've heard it would cost the average American $2400/year, and the same polution would be produced, but just by other countries. We'd basically be subsidizing the pollution of others, while they became richer.
2007-02-20 07:48:00 · answer #6 · answered by dr_tom_cruise_md 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
It would just help China and India grow faster than us.
2007-02-20 07:47:19 · answer #7 · answered by Immortal Cordova 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
See what happens if we don't do something about it.
2007-02-20 07:46:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋