The prize for worst implementation of climate policy goes to...

Whos your choice ?


  • Total voters
    34

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
18,274
19,358
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Liverpool
We have to listen to the scientists. Over the coming days/weeks we should get some numbers crunched on what this agreement means. Effects on global output of co2 between now and 2030, some rejigging of climate models etc.
You mean the ones that don't work or are grossly exaggerated?
 
The agreement doesn't but the new regulations that they will need in order to meet the targets will. There is an argument that they have sufficient powers under the Clean Air act but that is to be seen.
Err, no you are wrong, the President can make an executive decision and by pass Congress (a bit like Tony and the Fuel Tax).
If and once the Presidency changes, then it takes 3/4 of congress to repeal the decision.
 
How can the public be so gullible? It has nothing to do with man made climate change. It is a tax on humanity and everyone is being conned. :rolleyes:
Whether gullible or not, it doesn't matter, climate Change is getting so much media space, it is now uppermost in people's minds and I am loving it.
Just shows how out of step this government is. (and you):D
 
The agreement doesn't but the new regulations that they will need in order to meet the targets will. There is an argument that they have sufficient powers under the Clean Air act but that is to be seen.

Republican congress will defund the EPA and/or amend the act if they tried anything this big, and while Obama might veto, the next president (most likely a republican given the last election results) will sign it.
 
Err, no you are wrong, the President can make an executive decision and by pass Congress (a bit like Tony and the Fuel Tax).
If and once the Presidency changes, then it takes 3/4 of congress to repeal the decision.

In support of current laws, he can do an executive order.

Congress is already suing Obama over 'adjustments' he made to Obamacare because they think he went too far with that, so it's not a blanket loophole.

Wont hold up for 16 years though although as there is nothing binding in the agreement, it doesn't really need to.
 
In support of current laws, he can do an executive order.

Congress is already suing Obama over 'adjustments' he made to Obamacare because they think he went too far with that, so it's not a blanket loophole.

Wont hold up for 16 years though although as there is nothing binding in the agreement, it doesn't really need to.
You left out the 3/4 of congress to overturn. Won't happen, especially since Hilary is the frontrunner and who should win the next election. She supports it even more than Obama.
Seriously though, not important as it is is raising the consciousness of most people around the world. That's the first step, n need to raise the subject, the media and other countries are doing for them. Australia was a leader now it is a nothing.
Come next election here, it will be a major policy issue.
 
You left out the 3/4 of congress to overturn. Won't happen, especially since Hilary is the frontrunner and who should win the next election. She supports it even more than Obama.
Seriously though, not important as it is is raising the consciousness of most people around the world. That's the first step, n need to raise the subject, the media and other countries are doing for them. Australia was a leader now it is a nothing.
Come next election here, it will be a major policy issue.

3/4 of congress is needed to override a veto.
executive orders have no such override, they're a matter for the courts. The power is considered to come from the constitutional section that says the president must ensure laws are enforced, so EOs can be used for that, not to change/enact laws.

Hillary might be the frontrunner now, but that's because nobody is actually standing yet. With the mid term election results from a couple of weeks back, whoever the Republican candidate is will be the favorite.

Major policy issue...You'd better hope the pause finishes by then, or it'll be a major policy disaster. Remember, Julia only slipped it in because she promised not to do it when she realised the polls were against it then backflipped. If it didn't have the votes then, it certainly wont in 2 more years. Without further evidence (not rhetoric), support will shrink and the evidence this century suggest that the link between co2 and temperature rises is, at best, minimal.
 
Please don't bring Gillard into this, another matter altogether (and you and I will only strongly disagree with).
From what I have read, doesn't seem to be a shining light in the Republicans, unless someone comes out of the woodwork. The fact that there is no contender at this stage is an issue for them.
Hilary is already a high profile contender, a woman, did well in her role and speaks out very strongly. Think she already has a huge following.
 

The Coup

Premiership Player
Sep 4, 2014
3,641
1,682
AFL Club
Melbourne
The global right wing is cannibalising eachother politically, that's what capitalists do when their time is running out.

The Republican Party and the LNP will be unrecognisable in 5 years at best if they still exist. They stand for nothing and offer nothing but blame "It's your fault you're poor!" "If you can't afford kids don't have them!" etc etc
 

Todman

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 7, 2004
8,346
7,175
AFL Club
Hawthorn
From what I have read,
Hilary is already a high profile contender, a woman, did well in her role and speaks out very strongly. Think she already has a huge following.

Apart from the obvious, you and I read different websites , do you think that the Americans will for the first time since FDR vote for a 3rd term Democrat?

A yay or nay for Joe Biden?
 
Apart from the obvious, you and I read different websites , do you think that the Americans will for the first time since FDR vote for a 3rd term Democrat?

A yay or nay for Joe Biden?
Yes, I do, unless there is a Reagan type out there. Nay.
Edit: Have family in Connecticut - they don't trust Republicans, especially Tea Party types.
Murdoch press may also have a big influence this time more than ever.
 
Please don't bring Gillard into this, another matter altogether (and you and I will only strongly disagree with).
From what I have read, doesn't seem to be a shining light in the Republicans, unless someone comes out of the woodwork. The fact that there is no contender at this stage is an issue for them.
Hilary is already a high profile contender, a woman, did well in her role and speaks out very strongly. Think she already has a huge following.

When was the last time a 2 term president was replaced by someone from their own party?

We all know people vote incumbents out rather than challengers in, and the US system gives the candidates from the presidents current party the 'price' of those complaining against their predecessor without the benefits of incumbency.

The Republicans have 2 years to settle on a candidate, more than enough time.
 
Apart from the obvious, you and I read different websites , do you think that the Americans will for the first time since FDR vote for a 3rd term Democrat?

A yay or nay for Joe Biden?

3rd term isn't allowed (they changed the rules for FDR supposedly due to WW2...Then he died in office making it somewhat moot).
 
Yes, I do, unless there is a Reagan type out there. Nay.
Edit: Have family in Connecticut - they don't trust Republicans, especially Tea Party types.
Murdoch press may also have a big influence this time more than ever.

That could leave you conflicted, given that he supported Bill.
 

rodney hoo

Cancelled
Oct 24, 2014
2,503
1,843
AFL Club
Fremantle
Again with the 3%/97%.

You do realise that repeating something that's been shown to be false makes you lose credibility, right?

If the only way climate change believers feel they convince people is by repeating falsehoods, why would we believe them on anything?

You beleive they are false, I'm in titled to beleive what I think is correct, as I have said else where both sides have facts & opinions just because you don't beleive mine does not make them incorrect.
As far as credibility I'll make my own judgements just like you make yours. The whole world is starting to get on boardabout time you followed.
 
You beleive they are false, I'm in titled to beleive what I think is correct, as I have said else where both sides have facts & opinions just because you don't beleive mine does not make them incorrect.
As far as credibility I'll make my own judgements just like you make yours. The whole world is starting to get on boardabout time you followed.

I've shown you why they're false.

If you choose to deny facts and have faith, then that's religion, not science, and on that score, you're welcome to believe what you will, just don't try and force others to.
 

rodney hoo

Cancelled
Oct 24, 2014
2,503
1,843
AFL Club
Fremantle
I've shown you why they're false.

If you choose to deny facts and have faith, then that's religion, not science, and on that score, you're welcome to believe what you will, just don't try and force others to.

You have shown your facts in an article I read totally different, I will agree to disagree.
 
Jul 19, 2005
14,271
10,466
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Republican congress will defund the EPA and/or amend the act if they tried anything this big, and while Obama might veto, the next president (most likely a republican given the last election results) will sign it.

I think people here are underestimating the hostility between left and right in the US. It's not healthy but it is there.

Of course since all of it is completely non binding whats the big deal?

I see no one is talking about Canada missing it targets (and economy very similar to ours). These are the countries I am keeping on eye on because they are direct competitors to our main export business.
 
Back