Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (11871)	4/18/2001 3:13:52 PM
From: Clappy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Because they are thinking about their pocket books rather than our children's future. It's all about who can make their widgets cheaper... The widget companies fund the election campaigns... Not too hard to figure out. I wonder how many would have refused it if Bush had been backing it... It's sad.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (11871)	4/18/2001 3:16:07 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Tell us, why have virtually all advanced nations refused to ratify Kyoto? My guess? Because virtually all advanced nations are democracies, and no elected officials are willing to ask their people to make the sacrifices necessary to implement Kyoto. They put their reelection ahead of the environment every time.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (11871)	4/18/2001 6:02:37 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Because, as well as this - Message 15682282 - and this - Message 15682298 - few western nations in particular can see much point in deliberately handicapping their economies while not enjoying the current strength of the (competitor) nation that uses more energy and produces more CO2 than any other...? And without buy-in from the West, it's naturally doomed. In any race with an overwhelming leader , a handicap will only be agreed if that leader consents, otherwise its lead will only become wider. This is especially true if the pain is spread proportionately while the rewards for non-conformance are not... and the pain is long-term - that is, beyond the lifespan of the immediate event (next election) - while the gain is more likely to accrue to the next generation...