What's more important, Money or the planet?
That's the underlying question here, if we can all agree that the planet is
the most important thing, and I think we do ?? Then the only argument should
be how we go about reducing pollution quickly and effectively.
If Kyoto is so bad, why doesn't Bush in his infinite wisdom propose
something better?
No, he'd rather spend the $400 billion and his time on Star Wars because
thats what his pupeteers in the Pentagon want.
Granted, I understand some of his reasoning for wanting the systems, but we
need to protect the planet as a whole from our destructive way of life. It's
a matter of priorities, and I don't share his.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Fobare [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 July 2001 21:49
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Kyoto and global warming (was: RE: Hiyas! :))
> > According to the editorial, some estimates are that it would
> > cost the USA as much as $400 billion in lost GDP,
>
>Sorry just had to chime in here. IMHO, any statistics used in an editorial
>or coming out of a politicians mouth should immediately be questioned.
Yes, those cost estimates should be questioned. Since those are the figures
calculated by the Clinton administration, which fought for Kyoto(however
briefly), it is most likely that they are too low.
Dave Fobare
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
