why should not china sign kyoto. they are the worlds
number two poluter, but, kyoto puts absolutly no
limits on them. this is an example of what is wrong
with kyoto. it puts restrictions on just a few
countrys and mainly the U.S. and lets most of the
others go scott free. why? the world environmental
movement has been co-oped by the remenants of the old
world communtist movement after it colapsed in russia
and most of east europe. the goal is not clean air,
the goal is not clean water, the goal is to damage
capitalism and as such the U.S.
  really a smart move, if you oppose them then you are
immediatly accused of wanting dirty air and wanting to
poison the water.
   i'd like to start a discussion by asking why is
greenland named grenland when it is covered by so much
ice?
   oh, by the way, global warming has been discovered
to be in effect on mars. i am awaiting some
explaination as to how the U.S.A. caused that.
--- Kathy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> The point is, the US can no longer all all the shot
> in a global economy.  The
> Europeans don't need the US as an major importer -
> they can export to China
> or Japan, or even India.  China and India are poised
> to become the next major
> global economic powers. especially China.  China has
> signed the Kyoto
> agreement and the US has not.  If the European Union
> makes it a requirement
> to adhere to the Kyoto agreement for contractural
> agreements in trade, who do
> you think they will choose - the US or China?
>
> As I have asserted before, the US cannot afford to
> be the odd one out.
>
> I'd like to hear what our members from other
> countries think about this.
>
> Kat
>
> On Wednesday 15 December 2004 11:11 pm, ken barber
> wrote:
> > sure they are, but there are companies on the
> other
> > side of the pond that are dealing with some issues
> > too. trade is just that. trade. both sides get and
> > give. both sides benifit. if something interferes,
> > both sides get some consequenses.
> > to put it rather crudly, in a dog fight, both dogs
> > normally have teeth and both dogs get bit. and the
> EU
> > AND the US are neither little lapdogs. they are
> both
> > pitbulls.
> > take the chemicles mentioned in the article, sure
> the
> > e.u. can stop importing them. then what? you think
> the
> > chemicles were being imported for no reason? some
> > european company will go bankrupt becouse it can
> not
> > get what it needs or will have to pay so much that
> it
> > can no longer be compettive. and then what will
> the
> > U.S. not import from the EU? like i said the coin
> has
> > 2 sides, the sword is sharp on both edges.
> sometimes
> > the dog that bites first wins, sometimes the
> return
> > bite is worse than the first. the attacker
> sometimes
> > gets the worse bite.
> > there could be more than one rude awakening.
> >
> > --- Kathy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > One-sided it may be, but my company's having to
> deal
> > > with these very issues in
> > > dealing with European and Asian trade.
> > >
> > > Kat
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 15 December 2004 7:00 pm, ken
> barber
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > this one worked. this is an interesting site.
> i
> > >
> > > put it
> > >
> > > > in my favorites to return to. the article was
> > > > interesting too, even if mentioning only one
> side
> > >
> > > of a
> > >
> > > > 2 sided coin. very interesting indeed.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do
> good.
> > http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
>




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250