For this special edition of Macro Mondays, I wanted to touch on a topic that’s very recent and at the forefront of quite a few minds. On June 1st, President Trump formally announced that the United States would withdraw its support for the Paris Agreement: an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) designed to deal with greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation and finance starting in the year 2020. All aspects and participation in the agreement are voluntary by the member nations, at least for the time being, and the United States was one of three out of the 195 countries with representation that chose to descent from the agreement. The other two nations were Syria (which is obviously dealing with a ton of s*** at the moment, and has no funding left after attempts to quell civil war) and Nicaragua (which said that the agreement was not ‘green’ enough).

Trump had five main reasons for disassociating from the agreement: 1) it will cost Americans jobs, 2) the science is bogus, 3) it was designed to have a negative economic impact on the United States, 4) the United States will be at risk of more blackouts and brownouts, 5) it will cost “billions and billions” of dollars. If you click five main reasons for disassociating from the agreementfive main reasons for disassociating from the agreementyou’ll see how all points are being debunked by those in their respective industries.

Personally, I was angered by this, and so today I’m throwing my hat in the ring with some economic FACTS…

First disclosure: I’m not a scientist. And if you’re not a scientist either, you’re no more qualified than I am to argue the effects of climate change. So this is why I’m not touching that topic, nor will I in any comments. I’ve been agnostic on the concept of climate change for years, and I think this approach has enabled me to keep an open mind on things. I’ve traveled all over the world, and I’ve witnessed the effects that man-made pollution has had on nature and the health of city dwellers. I remain open-minded on the issue, and quite frankly you should be too.

Second disclosure: although I have a degree in Political Science, the arguments associated with political discourse are enclosed in a can of worms that I simply will not open. The rhetoric of the Political Right is that the Paris Agreement was unilaterally made by President Obama, and NOT a valid treaty in the eyes of the US government because only Congress has the power to ratify treaties with foreign countries. To which I say, ‘so what’? This is a treaty 
which potentially had the support of more than 70% of the United State population and Trump could have appeased the population by formally bring it to Congress for a vote. Instead, he pulled the same card as Obama and abused Executive power instead of attempting to re-establish order. If this had gone to vote in Congress, things would be different right now on both sides.