Globální oteplování, neboli změna klimatu, je nárůst teploty atmosféry na Zemi od konce devatenáctého století. V politice se debata o globálním oteplování soustředí na to, zda je toto zvýšení teploty způsobeno emisemi skleníkových plynů, nebo je výsledkem přirozeného vzorce zemské teploty. V roce 2022 Kongres schválil zákon o snižování inflace, který zahrnoval stovky miliard dolarů v dotacích na…
Přečtěte si více@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Když přemýšlíte o rovnováze mezi ekonomickým růstem a ochranou životního prostředí, čemu dáváte přednost a proč?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Představte si svět s čistším vzduchem, ale vyššími životními náklady kvůli přísným ekologickým předpisům; jak tento kompromis ovlivní váš názor?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Jak možnost zvýšeného počtu přírodních katastrof v důsledku změny klimatu ovlivňuje vaše názory na vládní zásahy?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Zaznamenali jste nějaké dopady změny klimatu ve vaší komunitě a jaká opatření by podle vás mohla být přijata na místní úrovni?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Jak podle vás budou budoucí generace posuzovat naše současné úsilí v boji proti změně klimatu?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Vzpomeňte si na okamžik, kdy jste cítili osobní spojení s přírodou; jak by zachování tohoto pocitu ovlivnilo váš postoj k ekologickým předpisům?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Kdybyste se museli vzdát jedné vymoženosti pro snížení emisí, co by to bylo a proč?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Jaké změny jste pozorovali ve svém místním počasí a jak by podle vás měla společnost reagovat?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Představte si svět, kde některá zvířata vyhynula kvůli ztrátě přirozeného prostředí; jak vás to nutí přemýšlet o našich současných environmentálních politikách?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Jak byste se cítili, kdyby vaše oblíbené venkovní místo postihlo extrémní počasí, a jaké kroky by tomu podle vás mohly zabránit?
@2TLJD2W4 roky4Y
No because no matter what the United States does to help the environment, there are many countries who abuse the environment just like we do today. The United States could be the cleanest most environmentally friendly nation in the world but we would be the only one. If you are going to put more regulations do it for the whole world. The environment is more than just the U.S.
@2TLGYPC4 roky4Y
Not convinced there is global warming. That said, everyone should be good stewards of the earth God gave us to live on rather than be after that almighty dollar.
@2TLG3SB4 roky4Y
This is a way to kill jobs. Businesses should do all they can to preserve the environment while creating jobs.
Non-profits should be encouraged to spearhead this campaign through private donations
@2TLC6JQ4 roky4Y
Anthropogenic global warming is a scam perpetrated by the United Nations.
@2TL4MPH4 roky4Y
Change it to global pollution instead of global warming and you'll get more bi partisan support to curb any root causes.
@2TJ68PR3 roky3Y
Global warming is a natural occurrence however we should still do what ever we can to protect the environment. The incentives need to be enough to warrant the business implementing them. I know a City who dumps sewage into a river and pays the fines because it is less than the cost to handle the sewage properly. That's messed up.
@2THY3CW4 roky4Y
Environmental regulations to control pollution are fine, but not in the name of "global warming" or "climate change." While I believe these are natural climate cycles, there is no harm in seeking to prevent egregious pollution.
@2THSPM74 roky4Y
No, tax carbon emissions instead. But also tax other emissions so that activities show their true environmental cost. Then use the collected money for environmental restoration and preservation.
@2THPT284 roky4Y
No EPA should not increase regulations to prevent global warming. The U.S. does plenty to reduce carbon emissions to the detriment of jobs and the economy. Pressure counties like China, India, and Brazil to reduce their carbon emissions. Never hear liberals complain about these countires.
@2THP64K4 roky4Y
government should stop the politics of environmental regulation; no funding for AGW; no Kyoto; no carbon tax; no secret treaties; no wealth transfer to UN or foreign despots
@2THJF6N4 roky4Y
Climate change is natural phenomenon and has and continues to change regardless of man's activities. Government policies should be based on science (not consensus) aimed at mitigating the effects of climate changes.
@2TH9XX54 roky4Y
I believe in the free market if the government instead of forcing people to go green makes their non greenness know people can choose to go with other companies costing the less green company money thus making them want to go green to beat the other companies.
@2TH8GMG4 roky4Y
This issue is based on politically motivated science. I don't think there is enough information to accurately make a decision.
@2TGK3KJ4 roky4Y
Petroleum companies should not be allowed billions in corporate wellfare. The rest should take care of itself.
@2JJ24KZ4 roky4Y
No, they need to reevaluate the thousands of laws and restrictions they already have and apply some common sense regulations.
@2JHYXCV4 roky4Y
Provide incentives for alternative energy production, stop subsidizing oil and gas and coal.
@2JHV9LG4 roky4Y
No, global warming is a natural occurrence. But it is good for businesses to be ethical. Provide fees for unethical environmental practices.
@2JHV4MY4 roky4Y
No, government regulations risk becoming corrupt and harming the people and things they are supposed to protect.
@2JHSK7V4 roky4Y
There is no Global warming! It's the natural cycle of the Earth. Right now, we're in a cooling phase, not warming.
@2JHRNW44 roky4Y
Emissions are a problem, but many of the alternative energy solutions are worse. We fool ourselves into believing that an electric car is better for the environment because we don't see the emissions....but much of the power for electrics comes from coal. Furthermore, the batteries are often made with unrecyclable materials that are quite toxic. Fund the research, but never be satisfied with the results.
@2JHP99W4 roky4Y
global warming cycles are normal, but adding incentives for alternate forms of energy should be consider to reduce any man made impact.
@NewEnglandDevil4 roky4Y
No, it is far more efficient to adapt to changing conditions, regardless of cause. Additionally, there are benefits to global warming including food production, reduced mortality due to cold weather, etc.
@2JHGFJP4 roky4Y
More unilateral action by our govt. while countries like China build things like huge canals through the rainforests and use the proceeds for a historic record peacetime military buildup is stupid.
@2JHBJMV4 roky4Y
Depends on the motivation behind those regulations and the science backing them. Track record so far is to find ways to increase tax with little or no environmental outcome - so NO, not without very good reason.
@2JH6QQZ4 roky4Y
Some regulation is needed but we also need to ensure we don't make it so complicated that businesses cannot compete in the US. or make it a requirement that goods shipped to the Us have to have the same standards as they would here. This will ensure more jobs stay here
@2JH38WY4 roky4Y
Penalties should be higher and stricter to keep environmental damage in check
@2JGLR2Y4 roky4Y
Government should increase environmental regulations when bad actors are harming the environment. Same type of question back to you: Should government increase financial regulations to prevent global financial problems?
No, the government should increase environmental regulations to prevent the destruction of our environment. Do not politicize protecting the environment by tying regulations to global warming.
@2JG6MBR3 roky3Y
Truthful studies are needed and only then should regulations be implemented, but not just based on theory, and proof has not been confirmed in the last 50 years, they should go back 200 years to determine if the earth is heating up or just a 100 year cycle.
@2JFRCZ64 roky4Y
No. Environmental regulations will not prevent global warming.
@2JDXSJT4 roky4Y
If it can be proven that global warming exists, and is caused by the emission of greenhouse gasses, the biggest cause of global warming must be the government. Early automobiles were a novelty, only afforded by the wealthiest Americans. It was not until our government poured trillions into building new and improving existing roads did the auto industry flourish. Then, with the government creating housing projects and government subsidized housing, criminals found it affordable to live in our nation's wealthiest zip codes, which caused a fleeing to the suburbs to avoid the government caus… Přečtěte si více
@2JDLZ9K3 roky3Y
Global warming is more natural than the ideologues would have you believe. I am for alternate energy but not before it is an economically viable solution. I do not approve of the govt forcing policies and technology before they are efficient and affordable. Pushing policies before affordable efficient alternatives exist push more people into poverty and dependence on the govt
@2JDG89PRepublikánské4 roky4Y
Yes, the government should always be looking to increase environmental regulations not because of Global Warming but because it is the best thing for the earth, but in balance with economics, technologies and incentives for American companies to grow. And truly for the environment and not to win votes or make friends wealthy.
@2JDB5GX3 roky3Y
Yes. Especially become aggressive in activism pertaining to regulations for the countries that are the greatest threats to our environment.
@2JD6LJ84 roky4Y
Halt production of chemicals, GMO's, insist of a zero discharge technology as an interim to a space-based manufacturing technology. Obviously the surface of the earth is not suitable to the evolution of an industrial technology. Best savings are from conservation first then develop decentralized energy production, mostly solar. Stop all coal, nukes, etc. Clean up the mess!
@2JD5LR94 roky4Y