Overconsumption" Vs. "overpopulation

The Kyoto Protocol was put forth by the United Nations to help improve the overall wellbeing of our planet's environment. Out of all the countries who were viable candidates to commit to the protocol, the United States, one of the greatest greenhouse gas emitting countries in the world, refused to sign. This lack of effort by the Americans was generally frowned upon by other countries. China and India on the other hand, who are also two of the biggest polluters worldwide, were fully exempt from the protocol. Should China and India have been exempt from this protocol? Should the United States be criticized for not ratifying the protocol?

First off, I personally believe that the decision to exclude China and India from the protocol was the right thing to do. Being two developing countries that are still struggling through the process of providing an improved quality of life for such massive populations, I think adding all these antipollution laws would have a negative effect on both of their economies. If you force growing companies to improve their environmental standards, it would definitely cost them a lot of money to achieve the necessary improvements. Not only would this lower total profit have a negative effect on the growth rate of the company, but it would inevitably cause job loss. All in all, the more a society is unemployed, the lower their standard of living. And in this situation, both China and India's living standards are already below the norm.

The United States on the other hand is a lot more developed. Although it has such a significantly smaller population than both China and India, its total production of greenhouse gasses is almost just as high. It is a fact that the United States is the greatest consumer in the world. The average American makes a lot more money, and spends a lot more money than the average Indian or Chinese person. Being such a rich country, I think that implementing environmental laws on large American companies should definitely be something to consider. Large corporations have so much money rolling in that sacrificing as little as 1% of annual profits towards helping the environment would already make a big difference. But somehow I don't see this happening any time soon.

In the end, I believe that the U.N. did the right thing in exempting both China and India form the protocol. Their still-developing situation would not be aided by the implementation of forced environmental standards. The United States on the other hand, should definitely be criticized for not signing the Kyoto protocol, especially when all other "fist world" countries signed. I find America's move very unclassy; this narcissism definitely tarnishes their reputation.