So far, Trump's approach of "we're going to take our ball and go home now - we can start talking about new rules as we're walking off the field" seems to be working quite well. Yeah, it pisses people off - but it gets the job done, and new deals made - and those pissed off people typically are fine at the end.
Note that China's nearly 3 times the population of North America - which includes everything North of Colombia. For the US, they're almost 5 times the population.
China is still in the development phase. Far from everyone has been brought up to a first world standard of living there, in fact the majority have not.
According to the World Bank, China has over 420 million middle-class citizens, and that's based on purchasing-power parity. They have a larger middle class than the entire population of the US and Canada combined.
I don't know when was the last time you were in China (I'm heading back for the 6th time this year - I spend 4-5 months total year in China), but the bigger cities are quite "first world" when you compare them to many places around the EU and the US. Yes, they still have hundreds of millions of poor, but China as a whole is high-2nd-world if anything, a lot better off than most of the rest of the BRIC nations and the 3rd world.
Yes Negotiations are long and complex, they take take a long time. At the end of the day there are often some smaller changes where no one is happy.
The Trump administration goes threw this process as well. However during the process he kills what is going on currently, thus putting everyone in pain until the process which would had happened would complete anyways.
Without that "pain" you typically get no motion - or glacial, at best, motion. There is no sense of urgency or a push to get things done until there is some "pain" in the system. Note how quickly the trade deals with Canada and Mexico came about, once the Administration declared NAFTA dead.
It's because all the smaller, lighter packages subsidise the heavier ones. Most of the stuff being shipped is small and not really worth the effort to carefully weigh and measure just to charge some precise amount.
Shipping small packages from China to the US are similarly cheap. Like a 300g padded envelope, via air mail, for around 7 RMB (about $1.00). And then, if you're a business, you can get it subsidized where you can receive a 40% discount on the marked postage level - meaning you can send that 300g package for around $0.60.
So the demand from the mass market for electric vehicles is really soft, then... eGolf dominated, and it was just 2000 units. I guess we can say electric vehicles may be ready for the mass market - but the mass market doesn't want them.
Well, what about a bike locked to a parking meter? Is that free to take?
At least in Los Angeles and San Francisco, using a parking meter as a bike stand/lock stand is illegal. Whilst I may not take it, a quick call to the local authority will have it cut free and impounded.
It's OK - these "innovators" are just doing what was already being done in China. Scooter and bike rentals have been a thing for quite a while in Shenzhen, Shanghai, Beijing, and other big cities, for quite a while.
How does that impact defense spending? We're back to where we were during the first term of the Obama administration on an absolute dollar basis, and lower as a share of GDP. Defense spending is not really up - that's the point.
What has been happening however is that plants are getting bigger from the increases in CO2, and their nutritional value has been rapidly decreasing, which has a knock-on effect.
That is only half the story. - and the scare-mongering side at that.
So yes, you need to eat 8% more to get the same nutritional value, but you end up with 40% more to start with, so it's not an issue. You can, in fact, feed more people (approximately 28% more people) and also increase your freshwater reserves significantly as well. A higher CO2 level would, in fact, provide a solid food/water bump for the world.
FY2017 spending was approved by President Obama; defense spending for the first year of the Trump administration was set by the Obama budget. It is back to around the level of 2010-2011 in dollars, and well under the first term of President Obama as a percent of GDP.
Because the climate cares not one whit about how much each person emits - it cares about the TOTAL emissions. If you want to solve CO2 emissions, you have to start with the biggest out there - China. They cannot be left alone, like the Paris Accord and most other climate treaties do. Of course, China's not going to give hundreds of billions of dollars to other nations, so that's the real reason they are ignored - they are not a source of money. Only the biggest (twice the US) source of CO2.
Why didn't we lose all the bugs back at during the Minoan, Roman, or Medieval warm periods, when it was warmer than today - and that way for multiple decades?
So what's different this time? I mean, the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, the Minoan Warm Period - all were hotter and longer than the current burst. I guess modern insects and mammals are just too wimpy...
Slashdot Mirror
So far, Trump's approach of "we're going to take our ball and go home now - we can start talking about new rules as we're walking off the field" seems to be working quite well. Yeah, it pisses people off - but it gets the job done, and new deals made - and those pissed off people typically are fine at the end.
Note that China's nearly 3 times the population of North America - which includes everything North of Colombia. For the US, they're almost 5 times the population.
China is still in the development phase. Far from everyone has been brought up to a first world standard of living there, in fact the majority have not.
According to the World Bank, China has over 420 million middle-class citizens, and that's based on purchasing-power parity. They have a larger middle class than the entire population of the US and Canada combined.
I don't know when was the last time you were in China (I'm heading back for the 6th time this year - I spend 4-5 months total year in China), but the bigger cities are quite "first world" when you compare them to many places around the EU and the US. Yes, they still have hundreds of millions of poor, but China as a whole is high-2nd-world if anything, a lot better off than most of the rest of the BRIC nations and the 3rd world.
Yes Negotiations are long and complex, they take take a long time. At the end of the day there are often some smaller changes where no one is happy.
The Trump administration goes threw this process as well. However during the process he kills what is going on currently, thus putting everyone in pain until the process which would had happened would complete anyways.
Without that "pain" you typically get no motion - or glacial, at best, motion. There is no sense of urgency or a push to get things done until there is some "pain" in the system. Note how quickly the trade deals with Canada and Mexico came about, once the Administration declared NAFTA dead.
It's because all the smaller, lighter packages subsidise the heavier ones. Most of the stuff being shipped is small and not really worth the effort to carefully weigh and measure just to charge some precise amount.
Shipping small packages from China to the US are similarly cheap. Like a 300g padded envelope, via air mail, for around 7 RMB (about $1.00). And then, if you're a business, you can get it subsidized where you can receive a 40% discount on the marked postage level - meaning you can send that 300g package for around $0.60.
It's where they trade goods with the lizard people living inside our hollow Earth. I thought everyone knew this?
So the demand from the mass market for electric vehicles is really soft, then... eGolf dominated, and it was just 2000 units. I guess we can say electric vehicles may be ready for the mass market - but the mass market doesn't want them.
Well, what about a bike locked to a parking meter? Is that free to take?
At least in Los Angeles and San Francisco, using a parking meter as a bike stand/lock stand is illegal. Whilst I may not take it, a quick call to the local authority will have it cut free and impounded.
It's OK - these "innovators" are just doing what was already being done in China. Scooter and bike rentals have been a thing for quite a while in Shenzhen, Shanghai, Beijing, and other big cities, for quite a while.
How does that impact defense spending? We're back to where we were during the first term of the Obama administration on an absolute dollar basis, and lower as a share of GDP. Defense spending is not really up - that's the point.
Wait, the VW eGolf and BMW i3 are not available for the mass-market in the EU? I guess holding down the number 1 and number 3 spots, respectively in sales in the EU in early 2018 don't count?
What has been happening however is that plants are getting bigger from the increases in CO2, and their nutritional value has been rapidly decreasing, which has a knock-on effect.
That is only half the story. - and the scare-mongering side at that.
Yes, increasing CO2 does decrease nutritional value per unit volume by about 8%. However, increasing CO2 also cuts water use by 5-20% and increases plant volume by 40%.
So yes, you need to eat 8% more to get the same nutritional value, but you end up with 40% more to start with, so it's not an issue. You can, in fact, feed more people (approximately 28% more people) and also increase your freshwater reserves significantly as well. A higher CO2 level would, in fact, provide a solid food/water bump for the world.
stay out of Seattle, go for Las Vegas. Wait, that's where Tesla's battery plant is sited.
Well, it's in Reno, not Las Vegas. I guess you could consider that "North" Las Vegas, if you ignored the 430 miles between the two cities...
FY2017 spending was approved by President Obama; defense spending for the first year of the Trump administration was set by the Obama budget. It is back to around the level of 2010-2011 in dollars, and well under the first term of President Obama as a percent of GDP.
Wage growth is up.
Unemployment bottomed out at 5% for the last year of the Obama Administration, then plunged after the election.
GDP was plunging during 2015/2016 and has since turned around.
The DJIA plateaued during 2015 and 2016 and exploded after the election.
NASDAQ followed the same trend as the DJIA, indicating the flat-line in growth was economy-wide, not just specific sectors
Manufacturing job growth is at a 23 year high
Basically you're making stuff up - the facts do not support your positions.
If this current ~3% annual growth, which began back in mid-2009 during Obama's first term
It did? I don't see a single year that reached 3% since 2005.
Nope - never happened.
And when will that happen? Until then - they have backups, it's why Germany is still building coal power plants.
Especially in Portland, where they stand by while domestic terrorists assault the elderly. Those are bad police.
Conspiracy theory? It's a graph of HadCRUT4 data, showing the rise from 1960 to 2005 wasn't unique - it happened ~60 years earlier, too.
Lil' Wayne was all about that a few years ago...
Certainly changed just as fast 100 years ago.
Because the climate cares not one whit about how much each person emits - it cares about the TOTAL emissions. If you want to solve CO2 emissions, you have to start with the biggest out there - China. They cannot be left alone, like the Paris Accord and most other climate treaties do. Of course, China's not going to give hundreds of billions of dollars to other nations, so that's the real reason they are ignored - they are not a source of money. Only the biggest (twice the US) source of CO2.
Why didn't we lose all the bugs back at during the Minoan, Roman, or Medieval warm periods, when it was warmer than today - and that way for multiple decades?
So what's different this time? I mean, the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, the Minoan Warm Period - all were hotter and longer than the current burst. I guess modern insects and mammals are just too wimpy...