Superman4 said: I think what everyone is missing here is the fact that aside from saving the US 100 Billion a year, leaving the agreement changes nothing. This agreement didn't force anyone to do anything to change, it was essentially a "here is what we should do" for the countries involved. It doesn't mean that we wont still use clean power in the US or move away from clean energy in general. It also doesn't affect the other countries in the treaty aside form our money will no longer be involved, something they shouldn't miss since they don't know exactly where it was going in the first place. |
You could say that about every single international agreement ever. It's not like a country is going to be arrested or something. But when you are part of an agreement the other parts expect you to fullfill it, at that DOES actually mean that this changes everything. Not only that, but by showing that the US is commiting to the treaty they can leverage that in talks with other countries and say "hey, we're doing something for the entire world, why don't you up your efforts." Now instead we're going to have the single most powerful country in the world on the outside, together with such world powers as syria and nicaragua. I suppose they had poor coal plant workers to take care of and europe was trying to steal their money as well.
What's the point about leaving if you're supposed to cut the emissions anyway? Why not stay in? Why in gods name piss of every other state and nation in the world if your going to do what you agreed to anyway?