So my climate undergraduate studies are boiling my blood and I hear everyone complaining so I wanted to write what I needed to read that I couldnt find … a constructive argument about Paris withdraw that had Macro-Economics and Science in the discussion… not just ambiguous complaints about “not living up to the agreement”.
Would you want 100,000 now or 25,000 for five years? read to the end…
I first went and studied our 2015 pledge here
Id like to hear more MBAs like me (an aspiring current candidate all but completed) chime in and apply their Organizational Leadership expertise but we dont hear that angle because its not the scandal hype/buzz that mainstream wants to hear. I want to know what Pruitt knows about Exxon Mobil; I think thats the BIGGEST secret that decided this withdrawal. We wont hear about it nor will it be uncovered because the country’s simple mindedness is deaf by the dull throb of Russian influential folklore noise and is blinded by false scandal. How could Exxon say publicly in march not to pull out of agreement but all last year be funding climate science deniers?…; its a BIG game.
With insider information of ExxonMobil in Trump’s pocket development drilling is very stymied in the coming years if such regulation as Paris’ was held over us. It is reasonable to suggest that America would miss out on future investments “FIRST” if restricted by Paris agreement stipulations. Decarbination will continue w-||w/o the agreement. We just wont be “HELD” to criticism now for not meeting it… there is a different kind of criticism moving forward, least now its on our own terms.
Consider Brexit it was a more serious withdrawal than what were doing right now… We dont think about it much because it doesnt “hit home”…
Look at the black and white of the “four corners” between these two agreements. This is an easier move not into any isolation but independence than that was for the UK… looking at it as a deal maker, I know Id rather be blue sky and open to innovate some BIG new invention ( may already have in my pocket ) and not be held hostage to share w/ some consortium that may not be working as hard as I am… besides there are mandatory domestic measures like state driven regulations that are relevant to keep us on pace with the targets of the Paris agreement without being under its “control” of the Green Climate Fund. I want the Billion a year to them to come to my self; my country. I can pledge to be noble and “do the right things” and make known I am by my actions without needing to agree to someone else’s precedent. If my data is transparent and it stays SCIENTIFIC I can be above reproach and never have to sign anything with no one.. No one can dispute that! I feel its reasonable to consider that reduction from the agreement projections of temperature increases will still happen even without the Paris Agreement intact w/ America bound by it.
I think we pulled out simply because we know we cannot make the 2025 deadline with our priorities. Even if we are just a lil over the 2005 baseline come 2025 wed be criticized in history as a failure rather than withdrawal which was not “fair and ambitious” as is asserted in the original pledge. “FAIR” to whom?
Science unfortunate dystopian reality “FACT”.
The global temperature will rise — there is no scenario in which there will be an overall reduction.
Reasonable trends reveal that what America would be able to accomplish under Paris is moot holding us to the fire, only just offsets what runaway India and China are trending doing whether or not they are transparent to the agreement.
So to me in a business decision, Id cut our losses and invest in myself.
I agree I dont like “Make America Great Again”.. but I do LOVE Make America GREATER (FIRST) ! So with that The Answer from the beginning is if you are smart, is you want 100k NOW. all will continue to depreciate… everything decays… how do you plan? we may just think different but this decision is more sound than most will ever give credit because many will never understand hyperbolic discounting.