So why, exactly, does the article need to go off attacking Hillary Clinton for losing the election? It seems rather bizarre that this article is just filled with all the stuff the right want to hear.
The article says the US has paid $1 billion into this agreement while everyone else has paid nothing. But what are they paying into?
The Green Climate Fund, which is actually what the source of this is talking about, and NOT the Paris Agreement, Green Climate Fund - Wikipedia has actually received money from other countries.
Seeing as Japan has a population 3 times SMALLER than the US's population, but they paid HALF what the US paid, and the UK has a population 5 times smaller and paid in 1/3 what the US has paid in, the article you showed is talking nonsense.
Every webpage with the quote "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," is a right wing alarmist website. Is there any evidence this guy actually said this?
I have a Green Fund of my own. Your chart shows 3 yr projections, not actual money transfers like our first $1B. Perhaps at this time, other countries have yet to actually pay a plug nickle.
So why, exactly, does the article need to go off attacking Hillary Clinton for losing the election? It seems rather bizarre that this article is just filled with all the stuff the right want to hear.
The article says the US has paid $1 billion into this agreement while everyone else has paid nothing. But what are they paying into?
The Green Climate Fund, which is actually what the source of this is talking about, and NOT the Paris Agreement, Green Climate Fund - Wikipedia has actually received money from other countries.
Seeing as Japan has a population 3 times SMALLER than the US's population, but they paid HALF what the US paid, and the UK has a population 5 times smaller and paid in 1/3 what the US has paid in, the article you showed is talking nonsense.
Every webpage with the quote "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," is a right wing alarmist website. Is there any evidence this guy actually said this?
I have a Green Fund of my own. Your chart shows 3 yr projections, not actual money transfers like our first $1B. Perhaps at this time, other countries have yet to actually pay a plug nickle.
So why, exactly, does the article need to go off attacking Hillary Clinton for losing the election? It seems rather bizarre that this article is just filled with all the stuff the right want to hear.
The article says the US has paid $1 billion into this agreement while everyone else has paid nothing. But what are they paying into?
The Green Climate Fund, which is actually what the source of this is talking about, and NOT the Paris Agreement, Green Climate Fund - Wikipedia has actually received money from other countries.
Seeing as Japan has a population 3 times SMALLER than the US's population, but they paid HALF what the US paid, and the UK has a population 5 times smaller and paid in 1/3 what the US has paid in, the article you showed is talking nonsense.
Every webpage with the quote "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," is a right wing alarmist website. Is there any evidence this guy actually said this?
Why Trump seeing red about the 'green climate fund'
how can you get mad if we stop the "voluntary" agreement? after all, it's voluntary.
