Emissions Targets - The reality

Prompted by the targets set by some nations to tackle climate change, global warming blah blah.. take it as a layman point of view, from a thinking citizen.
Well to start all the nations seem to have geared up to tackle the problem, even the people are too, or it seems. Go ask anyone on the street if they want the Government to t do something about it, the answer would be a definite yes, but the problem is whether they want to go the extra mile? Well, its a rather maybe.
I have lived in 2 countries India and USA. While India is already a mess, I would talk about USA, because the people here seem to be more concerned (80% population in India wont understand global warming), and say want to do something.
BUT, would they buy the cars which have low emissions, or give more milleage rather than a luxury car(even if they have the money). May be not Definitely. Would they use the bus instead of car, say if they have to walk half mile. Well may be, not definitely.
Now take the government, last year it passed a resolution saying by 2020, every car should give a 35 MPG. Well consider this, my Honda Civic 1998 model, gives 35 already on highway, and around 30 in city. So in short, they have put in a milestone which they already achieved 10 years back, meaning they are running 20 years behind.
Whether its an oversight of the Government or a whitewash of the public is debatable.
If you ask me, I would say by 2015 it should be 40 MPG(ideal conditions). dont know how they do it, see the money going to the account of the company board and sitting there, should be better utilized in research, might create some jobs too.
Now we come to the G8 summit going on, India, china, Brazil dont want any targets set, it hampers there growth. I dont know what makes them think that industries and emissions hamper growth. Specially India, which was at the pinnacle of civilization with only agriculture. Anyways, so the "industrialized" nations have set targets, for 2050. cut green house emby 80% by 2050. I dont know what makes them think they would make it to 2050, when people are already looking forward to the adventure in 2012.
Oh that 80% is from the 1990 standards, that was 20 years back. I want to ask just a simple question, cant we just set short term 5years target? say 5% in 5 years? Well have the 40year target if you want too, but what if when we reach 2050 and stil we didnt do anything? I do that everytime, I think I will do something by a week, and a week passes and I set it for the next. So I am worried.
The countries are again waiting for a global consesus on how much should they cut. I mean hello, if you are ready to cut emission why dont you go ahead and do it? Why do you have to wait for other countries to sign a treaty first? The industrialized countries want the developing ones to sign those too? If you showed the way into it, cant you take the lead and show them the way out? No they want a global consensus. Like Australia can cut by 5-25% by 2020 depending on what others agree. If you know you can cut by 25% why not go ahead and do that? That too Australia, the first country to be affected by Ozone layer hole.
The last point the fuel prices, I had an argument with a friend who was angry that they were increasing fuel prices in India, In India the prices are regulated and the government decided when to raise it. there are heavy subsidies on the price. When there is a global price hike the government looses money. So I am in favor of price hike, not only because it would save money for government, it would put a check on the fuel usage. The guy said, "see so many people need gas in everyday life, my Dad goes to office in his scooter, I go to college in bike and my sister uses a moped, an increase of 2 Rupees means 1000Rs more in a month. For example I used to fill my tank every 3 days. It would leave us crippled." My answer was all the things you said is the reason why I support the price hike. Look at USA, the prices are so low, that people dont care, they drive a truck when a bike can suffice. And in India we have a very good public transport system. I say increase the price by 10Rs and build a good public transport system. Increasing price would make them use it less, use the public transport more. It will do a lot of good. I should know, after I got a bike in India, I never touched my bicycle, even when I had to go a mile.
And when people use it for pleasure why should the government bear it? In India, Diesel is highly subsidized, because it affects the transport of essential goods. The price is half as of petrol. So people tend to buy diesel cars instead of petrol cars. I am in favour if the government puts a tax of 50000Rs on the diesel cars. Or makes it a rule that the subsidy is only for trucks.
Why should the government spend for your pleasure, then you will crib when the taxes increase.
What happened to logical thinking?