Du finder os her
Another dimension of the theoretical debate in the Treaty is its place within and its relationship to a broader debt law. Traditionally, liabilities have been subdivided into contracts entered into voluntarily and due to a particular person or person and obligations arising from an unlawful act based on the unlawful prejudice of certain protected interests, imposed primarily by law and generally due to a wider population. 5. If a Member has reached an agreement with the Fund in accordance with Article 3, the Fund shall use the currencies of other Members allocated to that Member in accordance with point 2(d) to exchange the currency of that Member, which shall be granted to other Members which have concluded agreements with the Fund in accordance with point 3. Any amount so collected shall be cashed in the currency of the member over whom it has been distributed. The same nations that are asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that together have cost America billions of dollars through harsh trade practices and, in many cases, lax contributions to our critical military alliance. You see what`s going on. This is pretty obvious for those who want to keep an open mind. Of course, the world`s biggest polluters do not have positive commitments from the Green Fund, which we have denounced. America is $20 trillion in debt.
Cities with little money cannot hire enough police officers or repair vital infrastructure. Millions of our citizens are unemployed. And yet, as part of the Paris Agreement, billions of dollars that should be invested here in the United States are being sent to the countries that have taken away our factories and jobs. So remember. For example, under the deal, China will be able to increase these emissions by an astonishing number of years – 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India conditions its participation on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries. There are many other examples. But at the end of the day, the Paris Agreement at the highest level is very unfair to the United States. The risks are increasing because, historically, these agreements are becoming more and more ambitious over time.
In other words, the Setting of Paris is a starting point, as bad as it is, not an end point. And exiting the deal protects the U.S. from future attacks on U.S. sovereignty and from massive future legal liability. Believe me, we have a huge legal responsibility if we stay inside…