args

developed countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change

I will be using the social contract where a country only has an obligation to its self "The EPA Has been funded highly in the last 10 years but has come up with little to no change to the environment what so ever" 2010 BBC Article I stand in firm negation on the resolution, Resolved: Devloped Countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change. My case is backed by two contentions: Developed countries already fund unsuccessful environmental programs Contention 2: There are other issues that are a higher priority to developed. On to my first contention, According to the Library of congress the EPA gets an annual budget of eight billion dollars a year, and rarely if ever come up with successful solutions to pollution or climate change. The BBC has reported multiple time of the success rate of the Epa and The british environmental conservation agency stating that both programs are failures and taxpayers should not be paying for them. As I have shown, developed countries have Environmental programs, countries like the USA, Britain , Canada, Australia, France,Spain and Portugal all have developed environmental programs, so countries have already accomplished the resolution. Also according to the British Environmental Conservation agency, climate change is only studied 3 months out of the 12 as stated by professor Martin Anthony of Cambridge university " what is the point of studying climate climate change if there is no way to control it. So if there is no way to control climate change why should developed countries make it a priority. This brings me to my next contention: Developed Countries have higher priorities. NASA States that climate change is a natural occurrence and as Professor martin Anthony of Cambridge university stated that there is no way to control climate change. Why should climate change be so high on the agenda? It shouldn"t, so the money used to fund these environmental agency"s in developed country"s can be used elsewhere, such as war effort, poverty and healthcare, the eight billion dollars that goes to the EPA can be used to minimize poverty, fund wars and fund healthcare. Climate change should not be a high priority in today agenda. In conclusion I have proven that Developed country"s already have funded programs that involved in environmental study and that climate change is not a priority to developed countries. With that I urge a vote in negation on the resolution. Thank you