The Kyoto Treaty that Gore wanted the U.S. to sign would have been an economic disaster for the U.S.. The U.S. would have had to follow the Kyoto Treaty even when "developing countries" would not have had to limit green house gas emissions. Gore's wants would have caused unemployment rates to skyrocket across the U.S. by moving U.S. jobs to so called "developing countries" (China, India, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico, etc..)
Thankfully, all voting Democrat and Republican senators agreed that the U.S. should not join any Kyoto Treaty that "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". 95 out of 95 voting Senators agreed that the Kyoto Treaty was bad for America.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00205
2007-10-12 15:17:55 · 15 answers · asked by a bush family member 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He hates America and does not think about the consequeces of such things. Europe is sinking fast with the Kyoto Protocol. The USA should not follow suit.
2007-10-12 15:22:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Did not make any difference whether the U.S. signed the Kyoto Treaty. U.S. companies have gone to China, India, Brazil, South Korea, and Mexico. We have very few goods manufactured in the U.S. any longer. The unions killled the goose that laid the golden egg. Industry became tired of it, and they have pulled up roots and left American in the dust.
2007-10-12 15:24:43 · answer #2 · answered by Sparkles 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Oh, sweetie, you're killing off the forest to save a tree. The real problem is that SOMETHING needs to be done to slow the rapid advance of global climate change, or else, and I promise u, the economy is going to be devastated anyway. And by the way, we produce way more greenhouse gasses than any of the developing nations u named. It is up to us to lead the way, for if we can create an economically feasable way to reduce our emissions, these nations will follow us. We pretty much call the shots in this world. There is good, good money in going green. You might want to invest in a few of the new green business on wall street. The biggest problem is that our govt is infested by businessmen hanging onto a 19th century fuel. They don;'t want to give up the ridiculous profits from fossil fuels, so they are endangering us all. They have otherwise smart people like u all confused with this "going green will kill our economy!" nonsense! When has change ever HURT our economy? Take a lesson from microsoft and EVOLVE. The only one whose economy will suffer is the Bush clan and their oilmen cronies. DONT BE A SUCKER.
2007-10-12 15:27:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Skyrocketing unemployment? Economic Disaster?
If Gore is right, and the majority of serious scientists agree that he is, these are the least of our worries.
I do know that I'm not going to convince anyone on the other side. We've all made up our minds, and now it is just a case of "wait and see."
2007-10-12 16:22:01 · answer #4 · answered by huduuluv 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Maybe he believes that he's helping to save the world (a noble cause).
Maybe he believes in the world as a community, not just U.S. against them.
Maybe he believes that the U.S. is the greatest nation in the world and can lead the global community to making this planet wonderful for generations to come.
I don't believe that he sees cleaning up, shifting our job base, and taking the lead as damaging.
But I'm naive and don't believe that people have ulterior motives for everything.
2007-10-12 15:36:03 · answer #5 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
But aren't we moving jobs out of the country anyway, Kyoto Treaty or not?
2007-10-12 15:25:06 · answer #6 · answered by Experto Credo 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I'm sure he probably didn't think about how that would effect the future of the US. He was just looking for a quick solution to the "global warming" problem. He didn't want to ruin the economy, but he should've thought it through a little bit more before introducing it to congress.
2007-10-12 15:24:14 · answer #7 · answered by Alawex12 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
now you know why there were just enough sensible American voters who said no to Gore.. He was not presidental material 7 years ago and he is not today..
2007-10-12 15:22:21 · answer #8 · answered by J. W. H 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
After seeing his (and Hillary's) ideas for LOTS of tax hikes in the US, does it surprise you he doesn't care about any economic impacts?
2007-10-12 15:21:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Maybe he's a member of Skull and Bones too.
Maybe they all are........
Who knows?
2007-10-12 19:22:32 · answer #10 · answered by Adelaide B 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋