Sentences with phrase «rich countries cutting»

While rich countries cut back on their emissions during the recent recession, China and India sailed through with no pause in their output of greenhouse gases.

Not exact matches

«At the same time as they have these massive tax cuts for the richest people in the country they actually increase taxes for a lot of working and middle class people, and so I think they see the child tax credit as a way to try to address that,» Marr said.

It's fitting that the week after the generation's greatest entrepreneur died, business leaders and academics descended on Washington to make the case for relaxing the policies that are cutting the country's richest vein of entrepreneurial talent: skilled immigrants.

Yes, there's nothing more principled than a candidate like Ron Paul who wants to further cut taxes for the rich, get rid of subsidies for student loans, get rid of the department of education and the environmental protection agency, and end aid to starving countries in Africa, just to name a few.

I'd like to have a president who doesn't keep his money in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.I'd like to have a president who knows more people are on food stamps today because tax cuts for the rich did not create jobs and caused this country to go down the drain.

«Just three weeks ago at the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment, they called for richer countries do more to cut their own carbon emissions and increase their support to the most vulnerable and worst affected communities and countries who are least able to protect themselves from climate change.»

Recently three new major studies funded by the Gates Foundation have been published, including a series in the Lancet, which delivered resounding and extensive evidence that breastfeeding saves lives, improves health and cuts health service costs in every country, rich or poor.

Politically, too, developing countries took an active part in GATT work only during the Uruguay Round, and even then the end - game was essentially settled by the big and rich, with the final cut a bilateral US - EU product.

«We are absolutely committed to making Scotland a fairer country for all — that's why we'll reject Labour's plans to increase taxes on half a million low income pensioners and Tory plans to fund tax cuts for the rich through cuts to disabled people.»

The group, which includes liberal organizations such as MoveOn, Tax March and the Working Families Party, has already spent more than $ 1 million advertising in congressional districts across the country to urge lawmakers from both parties to oppose tax cuts for the rich, and it expects to become more active.

Furthermore, in describing a country that is mired in poverty as a result of callous Government cuts, many Labour voices describe a world that does not ring true to C1 / C2 voters — people that are not poor but not rich and that carefully watch everything they spend.

That rich countries must cut emissions first and furthest in line with their historic responsibility for causing climate change and their capacity to tackle it.

«UK citizens visiting Europe will not be able to rely on the invaluable support of the British consular network as many of these are likely to be cut while the government pursues interests in richer countries.

Now to understand whether this tax bill (which largely cut taxes for the rich) was something good for the country or not, I need to know if trickle down actually works.

Rallies are being held across the country today to urge federal lawmakers to end tax cuts for the richest two percent of Americans.

However richer parts of the country such as Surrey, Buckinghamshire and Wiltshire fare much better with cuts of less that 1 per cent.

All over the country, the collision of decades of expansive social programs, federal tax cuts for the richest, and the aftermath of the global financial slide has produced oceans of budgetary red ink.

Tell them your family and America's poor, disabled, children, and almost all elderly people living in nursing homes — America's moms and dads and grandparents — can't accept devastating cuts to Medicaid to pay for a tax cut for this country's richest.

The shadow chancellor said the coalition government had given the «richest people in the country a huge tax cut» by scrapping the 50p top rate - something he said «can not be right».

Led by China, the G77 coalition of developing nations insisted that rich countries had to give more — more cuts, and lots more money.

The third is how much cash the rich world will put into a fund to help developing countries adapt to climate change and invest in cutting their own emissions.

Emerging economies like Saudi Arabia and China, the world's top emitter, want rich countries to commit to doing more to cut greenhouse gas output while allowing poorer nations to burn more fossil fuels to build their economies and end poverty.

But poor nations argue that more pressing issues need to be ironed out, for example the overarching dispute between rich and poor countries over how to share efforts to cut emissions, before more market - based mechanisms are developed or the groundwork for a global trading scheme is laid.

Plans by rich nations to add $ 100 billion of new money in the next decade to help developing countries cut emissions are evaporating.

The Chinese - and the UN - insist that rich countries with high per capita levels of pollution must cut emissions first, and help poorer countries to invest in clean technology.

Partners collaborate, share, and examine cutting - edge practices in the national shift toward clinically rich teacher preparation with leading other teacher educators from programs across the country.

In addition to rich multi-media presentations and user - friendly toolkits delivered via a cutting edge online learning platform, participants will have access to three highly interactive live webinar sessions to collaborate and share their learning with like - minded teaching colleagues from across the country.

This move, which the president claims is intended to stop the deforestation of the country's landscape and cut down on the fuel consumption associated with printing, shipping, and delivering the newspapers, may actually be a calculated move to stop the opposition - rich media from reaching subscribers with news of Correa's activities.

While rich countries work to cut their energy waste, poor countries are still hoping for a few megawatts, whether it comes from coal, a windmill, or anything else.

After touring disaster zones on the wave - swept coasts of Myanmar and in the crumbled hills of China's Sichuan Province, Secretary General Ban Ki - moon wrote an Op - Ed article urging the world's countries, rich and poor, to do far more to invest before inevitable disasters strike in ways that cut the chance of big losses of life or wealth.

«And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada — the rich countries — would say, «O.K., we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions»cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.»

I'm all for efforts to cut energy use and advance non-polluting options in rich countries.

But if rich nations all agree that capping emissions in developing countries is not yet expected because they haven't reached our level of emissions, doesn't that null and void the whole point of cutting emissions?

Another roadblock for Mr. Obama is Europe, which has been seeking commitments from rich countries for much deeper, faster cuts in emissions than the Obama administration has been willing to approve.

Despite Mr. Obama's ongoing focus on climate and energy, there have been no signs of a breakthrough in resolving the long - running standoff between rich and emerging countries over who cuts gases first and most.

The problem is, to get the legislation passed will require compromises aimed at protecting the economies of manufacturing and coal states, and to get a climate treaty negotiated will require measures guaranteeing that rich countries move first to cut emissions.

Big issues separate large blocs of countries, including the necessary level of cuts in emissions of industrial powers and the amount of money that would flow from rich to poor nations to help them withstand climate hazards and move to cleaner energy sources.

[UPDATE, 5/26: The meeting has ended with what appears to be some agreement on ways for rich countries to help poorer ones limit vulnerability from climate change, but with no shift in views on who needs to cut emissions how much and how fast.

At a summit in Manila earlier this month, the expanding Climate Vulnerable Forum, including 43 nations and 1 billion people, pressed for concrete commitments in Paris from rich countries both to more ambitious emissions cuts and aid.

The U.S. and other industrialized nations want to scrap the binary rich - poor division, saying large emerging economies such as China, Brazil and India must adopt more stringent emissions cuts than poorer countries.

The glaring gap between the yields of basic crops in poor and rich countries offers huge low - cost opportunities to improve people's lives and cut environmental impacts from farming.

Poor countries say industrial powers, which have spent a century or more benefiting from fossil fuels while adding billions of tons of heat - trapping greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, owe them both financial assistance in dealing with rising seas or shifting rains and a stable climate, which they say can be achieved only if rich countries commit to deep prompt cuts in their emissions.

The developing countries are worried it's a way for rich countries to shirk their own responsibilities to cut emissions.

via: AP / Yahoo News Global Climate Change UN Secretary General Rebukes G8 Nations for Weak Climate Change Commitments G8 Nations Agree to Cut Emissions 80 % by 2050 - Developing Countries Still Skeptical China, India to Rich Nations: $ 200 Billion to Fight Climate Change, Please

This bloc of four biggest emerging economies - Brazil, South Africa, India and China - has consistently been articulating developing countries» point of view at every forum while seeking bigger actions from rich nation to cut down emissions as part of their historical responsibility.

Developing nations say rich countries should cut emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

Cutthroat competition between nations has deadlocked U.N. climate negotiations for decades: rich countries dig in their heels and declare that they won't cut emissions and risk losing their vaulted position in the global hierarchy; poorer countries declare that they won't give up their right to pollute as much as rich countries did on their way to wealth, even if that means deepening a disaster that hurts the poor most of all.

Environmentalists want to take the pledges in hand but create a mechanism to increase their «ambition» as part of a binding agreement next year committing rich countries to cuts of 25 to 40 percent below 1990 emissions levels by 2020.

The countries that have made most headway in cutting emissions are developed, relatively rich, and settled on a modest economic growth path.

The UN said it will use Tuesday's gathering to press world leaders to do more: to cut more carbon and, for the rich countries, put up more cash to help poor countries cope with climate change.