G7 leaders reach impasse on climate; urge cyber crackdown

Strange how other countries are able to balance addressing climate change with economic aspects, but the US does not seem to be able to. Sad.

Trump cares as much about science and facts as he does working class Americans.

They were also disappointed that he did not touch on Russia, which was expelled from what was then called the G8 in 2014 because of its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

How does anyone still refute Donald's Russian ties?

Strange how other countries are able to balance addressing climate change with economic aspects, but the US does not seem to be able to

But they aren't able to do so without America. As America is a vastly larger economy compared to the other countries in the G7, it is expected to pay vastly more.

Economic growth in developed countries is essentially nil, and the current cost of doing business in these heavily regulated countries has been the main driver of forcing jobs to relocate to developing countries. These developing countries, particularly China and India are heavy polluters, yet the Paris agreement does not apply to them until at least 2030, and already India says it will not be able to meet it's climate goals at that time.

What is basically is supposed to happen is that developed countries are to tax the hell out their companies and citizens, and send this money to developing countries. Already China is complaining about the delays in receiving the money it was promised. To raise this money (because nearly all developed countries depend on deficit spending to pay their bills), bonds must be sold. China is the main buyer of these bonds, so in order to give money to China, money must essentially be borrowed from China at interest, and be repaid to China. While at the same time, the increased financial burden of further environmental regulation forces companies in America and Europe to outsource ever more of their manufacturing to places like China, which of course is immune from any of the burdens of the Paris climate treaty.

And in the end, there will be no effect on the climate. You cannot fight climate change when change is the climate's natural state. Never in the history of the world has the climate been stable. Sea levels now are 400 feet higher than their lowest point, and 399.9 feet of that gain occurred before man invented the steam engine. Deserts exist were there were once oceans, and vice-versa. Climate change is not about the environment, but the powers-that-be looking ways to increase their wealth and power.

You cannot fight climate change when change is the climate's natural state.

But you can fight the degree to which humans affect it, seeing as the change has been drastically affected by human actions.

Or are you one of those people that doesn't actually study the client, but disbelieves those 97% of peer-reviewed scientific papaers, written by scientists who are actually studying the climate as their life?

Because yeah, your non-scientific opinion would definitely make more sense to believe, right?

This whole idea that climate changes naturally, and therefore humans cannot have had an effect on it is like saying someone who stabs a person can't have any responsibility for the other person's death, because all people die anyways.

Trump cares as much about science and facts as he does working class Americans.

Yeah, if the other party cared about working Americans, they would be in power, everywhere instead of being the moronic vegan scream party of the coastal areas.

But they aren't able to do so without America. As America is a vastly larger economy compared to the other countries in the G7, it is expected to pay vastly more.

Bingo!

Yeah, if the other party cared about working Americans, they would be in power, everywhere instead of being the moronic vegan scream party of the coastal areas.

Seeing as the people chose Hillary, by a wide margin, your comment makes no sense.

so basically bombing civilians and selling weapons and stopping the people on this planet having the right to choose what they want on the internet is the marvelous achievement of this all.

Come on Stranger, while we both see through DT's faux populism, there's a reason why Democrats wield so little power at all levels of government. If they'd spent more time representing their constituents instead of giving paid speeches at Goldman Sachs or plugging the TPP or backing wars & interventions abroad we'd not be stuck with Trump in the first place. Liberals should spend less time defending a horrible, twice-failed primary candidate and more time advocating for the authentic populism that Sanders or Warren represent. I don't care that Clinton won the popular vote--that's sadly not how American elections are decided. Bottom line is she lost to a total moron. Perhaps she and her party could spend more time reflecting on why that is. The Russkies, dumb voters or the electoral college is about as far as they've gotten after nearly 7 months. In other words, zero accountability and by and large they're pushing the same neoliberal "cures" their corporate benefactors favor.

Seeing as the people chose Hillary, by a wide margin, your comment makes no sense.

And yet, she didn't win, never visited the State of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, lost in Michigan, and the funny thing is, she still can't and won't take any responsibility on her part, amazing and none of the Democrats won anything, they had 8 years to solidify their power and to, show the people how they care for the average American, in fact, they keep losing elections, maybe one day they might get it together and win some in the future.

@jcapan

Pretty much on point.

Well if you accept that man impacts the climate then it would follow that you would support man's effort to reduce his impact. No real mystery there.

That being said, there has to be balance. Too much protection or not enough is a hard balance to strike.

Come on Stranger, while we both see through DT's faux populism, there's a reason why Democrats wield so little power at all levels of government.

Yeah - it's called the electoral college, which went against the will of the people.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Hillary fan, and I think the DNP did some shady stuff against Sanders, who should have been the candidate. But regardless of all that, the people chose Hillary and the DNP, so Bass' assertion about why she's not in power is incorrect. She's not in power not because the people didn't want her (they did), she's not in power because the electoral college went against the will of the people.

Trump's economic adviser Gary Cohn said Trump's views on climate were "evolving" and that he would ultimately do what was best for the United States.

That's part of the problem. Trump fails to understand that what's "best for the US" right now & jobwise (only) could/will very well harm/impact the US (and others) in the very near future.  

But other leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and new French President Emmanuel Macron, had hoped to sway the president at his first major international summit since entering the White House four months ago.

Good luck with that. Very hard to change someone who lives his life with blinkers on.

Yeah - it's called the electoral college, which went against the will of the people.

Of California and the coastel States, sorry, but that's our system, anyway, it's over, move on, she had her chance, the Dems had their chance, they could have changed the narrative overall and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Hillary fan, and I think the DNP did some shady stuff against Sanders, who should have been the candidate.

I agree.

But regardless of all that, the people chose Hillary and the DNP, so Bass' assertion about why she's not in power is incorrect.

It's not incorrect, she is not the president, there is no arguing, it's a simple "yes or no" and she is not, she had her chance and she blew it, she is the one to blame, No one else. So at this point, discussing what could've, would've, should've been is so irrelevant now. She lost twice, that should tell the woman something. I think California should separate from the union, leave the rest of us alone and crown her as their Queen and the libs can drool and swoon at her feet

Of California and the coastel States

Nope, the will of the people of America. The vote wasn't only in coastel [sic] states, it was in all states. You can try to to argue that some Americans are lesser than other Americans all you want, but it's a fallacious argument.

anyway, it's over, move on

I'll do it as soon as you stop trying to make the false claim that Trump and the DNC were the choice of the people. They weren't. It's over. Move on.

It's not incorrect

Sure it is. The people chose Hillary and the DNC. Your claim that it was otherwise is incorrect.

I think California should separate from the union

I'd agree with you on that. California would be better off without the rest of the country.

Maybe, maybe not. But that doesn't change the fact that the party in power is not the party that the people chose, as Bass was trying to claim.

By any objective assessment the Democratic party is less popular than it's been for nearly a century. They hold less power than they have since 1920. In addition to their obvious and ongoing congressional failures, they now hold majorities in only 31 of the nation's 98 legislatures, having lost 800 seats since Obama was first elected. And only 15 governors are Democrats.

Nope, the will of the people of America. The vote wasn't only in coastel [sic] states, it was in all states.

Not true, blue was just a few specs on the map, California and the coastal areas, she's queen, although, I don't know why.

You can try to to argue that some Americans are lesser than other Americans all you want, but it's a fallacious argument.

I'm not arguing anything, I just see the facts and I see Trump in Europe at the G7 summit as the POTUS and I see Hillary off in a funny had still moaning and whining a a college. If she were that good and that smart and didn't lie about her mails, servers, had an economic message, she'd be president now, no doubt in my mind about that.

I'll do it as soon as you stop trying to make the false claim that Trump and the DNC were the choice of the people. They weren't. It's over. Move on.

The ONLY thing that matters is the result and No one told Hillary to not visit Wisconsin and the other reliable Bluest of Blues States. Doesn't matter, the election is over, she can't turn back time and neither can you or her supporters, its Trump for the next 4-8 years.

I'd agree with you on that. California would be better off without the rest of the country.

Yes, cut it off, take NYC and attach them and the other coastal states and sew them to Hawaii together.