
USA pulls out of Paris climate deal - Numberwang
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40108659
======
k-mcgrady
Current post title is: "USA pulls out of Paris climate deal".

Article title is: "Trump 'poised to quit Paris climate deal".

More than likely it's going to happen in the next few hours but until then the
title is inaccurate.

~~~
rgbrenner
Not hours. Trump tweeted earlier today he'll make the announcement "over the
next few days".
[https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/86990345951191859...](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/869903459511918592)

So the title is purely speculation.

~~~
simias
It's not official but many news outlets have sources telling them the decision
has been made. Although given how quickly Trump has changed his mind on some
issues in the past, it's probably better to wait for the official announcement
indeed...

------
simias
As a non-american that was my main worry about the Trump presidency. Well here
we are. I wonder how much more time well waste not actively fighting climate
change because of this.

At least I hope that the rest of the world will stay true to its word, but if
america gains an unfair economical advantage by not following the rules I
can't really imagine how it could work out. Could Europe and China impose
sanctions on the USA for pulling out of the deal? Seems very doubtful.

~~~
panzagl
Is China following the rules? Eastern Europe? Genuinely curious- here's your
chance to convince a USian that this is more than trying to drag the US down
to everyone else's level.

~~~
k-mcgrady
1\. I don't believe there is a monitoring system. If you sign up you agree to
certain things and everybody hopes you stick to your word essentially.

2\. Why does it matter what China or 'Eastern Europe' (which specific states
are you referring to?) do? Adults shouldn't need to have it explained to them
that just because somebody else does something, doesn't mean they should also
do that.

Finally regarding "dragging the US down to everyone else's level" \- what
level is this? I'm not sure the best way to look at the figures but, per
capita at least, the US is one of the worst C02 polluters coming in at 8th
whereas China is down at 55th.

~~~
panzagl
So China emits twice as much CO2 as the US, but because they have a bunch of
subsistence farmers it's ok? Sounds like the US is on the right track by
increasing income inequality...

~~~
panzagl
You need to reduce overall emissions to affect the climate, not per capita.
Australia is worse per capita, but they could produce 0 CO2 and it wouldn't
matter if your goal is to affect climate change.

~~~
k-mcgrady
With your talk about 'dragging the US down' though surely reducing emissions
so that all countries are on an equal level per capita is the fairest
solution? Also by reducing per capita emissions you are reducing overall
emissions.

------
danso
More details from the NYT, in which it was noted that things are not final, as
President Trump is set to meet with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson this
afternoon. Tillerson has been advocating on behalf of sticking to the deal:

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/climate/trump-quits-
paris...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/climate/trump-quits-paris-
climate-accord.html)

> _And Mr. Trump has proved himself willing to shift direction up until the
> moment of a public announcement. He is set to meet Wednesday afternoon with
> Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who has advocated that the United States
> remain a part of the Paris accords and could continue to lobby the president
> to change his mind._

------
voidhorse
Regardless of the deal itself, pulling out of this is a huge move as far as
foreign policy and the U.S. relation to the rest of the world is concerned.

This most certainly sets the U.S. in a new light/new orientation on the global
economic scale, and reiterates the sense of growing detachment Merkel recently
espoused.

------
bryanlarsen
The actual headline is "Trump 'poised to quit Paris climate deal'"

------
Gravityloss
Do you think the Paris climate deal was/is potentially an effective way to
limit emissions?

~~~
jackyinger
It was better than nothing. It's better to have less progress than necessary
than regression.

~~~
ythn
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism)

~~~
Gravityloss
I don't think that's logically the same thing.

~~~
ythn
It's not exactly the same, but still similar:

1\. This is something

2\. Something is better than nothing (is it?)

------
therealmarv
America first! Planet Earth second.

------
Algent
Can they actually even pull out ? Deal was signed, US can easily choose not to
apply but pull out I'm surprised.

~~~
jakewins
Sure, the US isn't even in the agreement currently, it hasn't been ratified by
the Senate.

Independent of which, international treatises are treated by US law as part of
regular domestic legislation, meaning any treaty the US enters can be exited
by any act of congress that supersedes it, just like any regular domestic US
law. This, as an aside, is why it's been constitutional for the US to break
all the treatises written with native American tribes.

~~~
maxerickson
Treaties and agreements like this one also usually specify an orderly
withdrawal procedure.

------
accountyaccount
Telling 199 other countries that you can't commit to something is just
generally a bad move on its own.

------
edelans
So this is how America becomes great again... Wow, I'm impressed.

