Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: US Green New Deal  (Read 400 times)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
US Green New Deal
« on: February 11, 2019, 09:10:27 AM »
I believe there are two proposals in the US with the name Green New Deal. One by the Green Party and the other now by Democratic representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Edward Markey.

I figured it deserves a thread of its own, so it doesn't get discussed in a fragmented manner in other threads.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2019, 09:11:15 AM »
From another thread:

Could go in any number of threads, like media bs good or bad, but I think it'll work just fine here:

Let's call it the PUSH BACK begins? Let's also call out that when arguing against Paradigm Shifts 99.9% of the complaints come from people who are totally STUCK in the existing PARADIGM .... people like xxxxxx, xxxxxx, and xxxxx et al (y'all know who they are] have major difficulties like this.  It's a lack of vision. It's a lack ability to see anything different than what already is.

In this regard AOC/Markey's New Green Deal equally suffers from such constraints as well -- those constraints limit it's ability to make a historic difference or to lead the nation to a better place. It's been written by Americans in America where all kinds of pre-existing Fallacies live and have their Being no matter how "liberal/progressive" they may believe themselves to be - they are still STUCK FAST to a rock like a chinaman's hat by the sea. ;)

This little LAT article (I'd call it a missive) while not trying to shows precisely how this surfaces and explains why this is so (imho for those with eyes to see.)

A few extracts:
AOC's Green New Deal could finally force the U.S. to get serious about climate change
By The Times Editorial Board Feb 08, 2019

The Green New Deal legislation introduced in the House by rookie Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and in the Senate by veteran Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) acknowledge the freight train barreling down on us all, and, to its credit, does what has been missing in the debate. It bellows out a bold, transformational, no-more-baby-steps approach to a catastrophe that has been ignored for too long even by the non-climate deniers in Congress, where oil and gas interests have held sway for decades and where inaction is always easier than the alternative.

To that degree, we welcome the effort and endorse its sweeping calls for getting Americans out of their cars, for transforming our power sources from fossil fuels to renewables, for seeking to recalibrate the nation’s economy away from the things that may kill us, and for reorienting us toward more sustainable means of production, transportation and daily living. Good for Ocasio-Cortez and Markey for making a dramatic statement acknowledging honestly where we are and how far we need to go.

[ now comes the PUSH BACK from unintelligent mindless ignorant fools at the LAT Corporate Troughs ]

On the other hand, we live in the real world, and if this potentially existential problem is going to be addressed, it is going to have to be addressed there. In that regard, this proposal — expressed in twin, nonbinding resolutions — suffers from overreach. It reminds us a bit of the talk about healthcare for all and a livable wage for all and free college for all. Who isn’t for those things? (Well, some people).

As a vision statement for the progressive left, the New Green Deal is admirable, but also largely unreachable. The difficult question is not “Do you support social justice?” or “Do you oppose poverty?” but “How do you fix those in a cautious, money-dominated, politically polarized, uncertain nation like ours?”

More significantly, why laden a clarion call for revolutionary action on climate change — which has wide popular support, according to polls — with attenuated social justice measures that can be more fractious?

[ BECAUSE DIMWITS THESE ISSUES ARE JOINED AT THE HIP - THEY ARE CREATED BY THE SAME SYSTEM AND THE SAME DELUSIONAL BELIEFS YOU BELIEVE IN ]

The nonbinding nature of the Green New Deal legislation is both a weakness and a strength. On the one hand, we are too far along the path of global warming for symbolic acts. On the other, at least the proposal offers targets for binding legislation in the future that could move us closer to where we need to be.

The more controversial elements of the proposal, meanwhile, should either be excised or allowed to wither on the vine.


For instance, the measure calls for “high quality union jobs” and guaranteed jobs for all.

But unions are the creations of workers and ought to come into existence through workplace democracy, not government edict. [ A Fallacy and a Denial of Historical Fact!!!]

And what would a guaranteed-jobs program look like? How would it get paid for? What would those jobs be? The Green New Deal also calls for “ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies,” and “providing all people of the United States with high quality health care [and] affordable, safe, and adequate housing.” [b]What in the name of John Muir do those goals have to do with combating climate change?[/b]

[ Um? Pretty much everything imho. Dumb as dirt and half as smart prattles on the know nothing nobodies at Corporate Media Editorial Boards. Not the smartest people in the room that's for sure. :) ]

 We urge policymakers to focus the debate on the core crisis of climate change, while recognizing the magnitude of the transformations required to address it. Regardless of what happens to the Green New Deal proposal itself, serious work lies ahead.

And given Congress’ general inability to act, the work falls to all of us, from personal choices in consumption to pressuring elected officials loudly, strongly, and incessantly to get their heads out of the sand and deal with this.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-green-new-deal-ocasio-cortez-markey-congress20190208-story.html

Oh Mirror Mirror on the Wall ......... always with the right advice but never practising it. :)
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2019, 09:12:20 AM »
And another one:

It's Time to Think Big on Climate Change
By Eugene Robinson


Enter the resolution, introduced Thursday by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., calling on Congress to create a Green New Deal.

Pelosi has sounded skeptical. "It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive," she said Wednesday, according to Politico. "The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they're for it, right?"

I'm more impressed than the speaker is, however. The point of the resolution is not to propose specific, detailed policy prescriptions. What it does accomplish, though, is lay out the enormous scale of the climate change problem -- and, as a commensurate response, call for "a new national, social, industrial and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/02/08/its_time_to_think_big_on_climate_change_139410.html

Round and round in circles we go.

"I'm all for taking urgent revolutionary actions to address climate change BUT .............. gee we gotta be realistic right?"
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Wherestheice

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2019, 10:09:39 AM »
I support the green new deal, but I don’t expect much to happen
"When the ice goes..... F***

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1604
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2019, 12:05:43 PM »
Sadly, it seems to me that they are using the climate change issue to introduce "socialist" policies. Climate change is a difficult enough problem as it is. BY using climate change as a conduit to introduce "social justice" issues, they make any progress even more difficult. They give cowardly deniers more ammo and increase resistance among the population who does not care to advance things like inequality.

Please don't get me wrong. Inequality and cronyism are real issues, but they are separate from climate change. Solutions to climate change must come from all sectors. Government, industry and individuals. There are free market solutions and there are social justice solutions. They both need to be implemented.

I do agree with the scope of the solution. Climate change is a the biggest, most complicated problem humanity has ever faced. It will require bold leadership and huge efforts to solve it.

I for one wish everyone pushing for a green new deal wisdom and the capacity to keep petty politics away from the real, life and death issue of climate change.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2019, 12:13:58 PM »
Inequality and cronyism are real issues, but they are separate from climate change.

How can they be separate when they stem from the same system? Do you really think the problem of AGW can be solved, while inequality stays the same (of course, the system wants to increase it to further grow and concentrate concentrated wealth)?

It is impossible to solve anything, while at the same time making the likes of Gates and Bezos trillionaires asap.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1604
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2019, 12:50:27 PM »
Quote
How can they be separate when they stem from the same system?

They don't. China, Russia, Venezuela all have socialist leaning government, and they all emit copious amounts of CO2. Even soviet Russia was a CO2 emitting machine. In the US, a capitalist bastion, unions and government employees are responsible for very significant CO2 emissions.

Here is an image for income inequality by country:



Here is a link for CO2 emissions per capita per country:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/270508/co2-emissions-per-capita-by-country/


As you can see, nations with the highest inequality don't look anything like emissions per Capita, except for the US.  The Netherlands is a good example of low inequality but high emissions per capital. Chile is a good example of very high inequality but low emissions per capital.

Heck, one of the top self proclaimed "socialist" countries in the world, Venezuela, survives out of fossil fuel sales. Their fossil fuels are government owned and "for the people". The fossil fuel they sell to pay for their socialist paradise emits as much carbon as capitalist Texas oil.


To be clear. I 100% the green new deal. This needs to be done. This conversation must be had. We must disagree about socialist and capitalist policies and reach an agreement that neither of us likes but solves the problem that will end both capitalism and socialism.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2019, 05:01:04 PM »
This isn't about socialism and capitalism, but about growth and concentrated wealth. All political

As you can see, nations with the highest inequality don't look anything like emissions per Capita, except for the US.  The Netherlands is a good example of low inequality but high emissions per capital. Chile is a good example of very high inequality but low emissions per capital.

Heck, one of the top self proclaimed "socialist" countries in the world, Venezuela, survives out of fossil fuel sales. Their fossil fuels are government owned and "for the people". The fossil fuel they sell to pay for their socialist paradise emits as much carbon as capitalist Texas oil.

I'm not saying that inequality and AGW are somehow interrelated, or that one causes the other in some sort of correlation.

You compare apples and oranges. You can't compare Chile and the Netherlands, because the latter is decades ahead. Given enough time, Chile would reach Dutch conditions, using the same system (as the system is global, which also makes comparing individual countries unproductive). Conversely, inequality was greater in the Netherlands in the past.

In some countries there will be less inequality and more emissions, or more inequality and less emissions, or any combination you can think of. Because AGW and inequality are just two of many consequences stemming from the same system. Some countries will have more depleted soils than others, others suffer more from financial bubbles, yet others are involved in resource wars.

All of this is caused by need for GDP growth to fuel, grow and further concentrate concentrated wealth. You can't solve any of those problems, if you leave the system as is.

Quote
We must disagree about socialist and capitalist policies and reach an agreement that neither of us likes but solves the problem that will end both capitalism and socialism.

I don't know if stopping concentrated wealth to act as a black hole, will necessarily end either one. But I agree it would be something entirely new. This hasn't been done since primitive times, when in some tribes there was a taboo on excessive egoism and material accumulation. If this taboo doesn't return, nothing will be accomplished.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

wili

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2374
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 224
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2019, 05:06:41 PM »
For the record, I agree that socialism is no guarantee of low emissions. On the other hand, if your goal is both adequate human welfare and small footprint, I think we will need some system that at least incorporates some aspects of socialism.

As I recall, Cuba is the only country that has ever hit the sweet spot of low percapita foot print and adequate human well being (according to a WWF survey a few years ago), and surely that had something to do with their socialist policies (as well as being in the midst of their 'special period').

But yes, we have to move beyond these 19th century ideologies if any part of the human project is going to make it into the next century with anything like a civilization.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1604
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2019, 06:32:19 PM »
Quote
All of this is caused by need for GDP growth to fuel, grow and further concentrate concentrated wealth.

I'll agree that GDP growth has become synonymous with well being, but that is the wrong interpretation of GDP growth. To sustain our civilization we must measure well being in many more ways than just GDP growth.

 Another common misconception is that GDP growth is synonymous with carbon emissions. That is historically true, but new technologies can decouple GDP growth from emissions.

My hope is that the Green New Deal (GND) looks at well being and the common good reflected on GDP growth but also on many other factors that make civilization safe and enjoyable. I also hope that they try to keep growing the GDP while decoupling GDP growth from emissions.

Quote
As I recall, Cuba is the only country that has ever hit the sweet spot of low percapita foot print and adequate human well being (according to a WWF survey a few years ago), and surely that had something to do with their socialist policies (as well as being in the midst of their 'special period').

Cuba is a great example of natural selection and climate change. Not Climate change in a physical sense but economic climate change. The US embargo on Cuba provided a selection bias. They had to make do with what they could access and they succeeded. They survived austerity and manage to keep an adequate  quality of life. As a result they became stronger. 

Looking at Cuba today one would forget all the pain Cubans had to go through to invent a system that worked for them despite the government and the Embargo.

I always liked this article about Cuba and Technological disobedience:

FTA:

Quote
“The Cuban home became a laboratory for inventions and survival.”So Cubans learned to make do. When something breaks, they patch it up. When something doesn’t work, they fix it. And when something is altogether lost, they invent it. They grill meat on metal chairs. They seal the bottoms of cars, transforming them into boats. From the suffering of 30 years of isolation has sprung a generation of amateur engineers, inventors and welders."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/isolation-generation-master-inventors-cuba


In a global scale we are going to have to do like Cuba.  We are going to have to adapt and become inventive in everything we do. In Cuba the government got in the way if invention and free thinking. The GND should empower individuals  and communities to identify their vulnerabilities fix them.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4268
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2019, 09:53:22 PM »

In a global scale we are going to have to do like Cuba.  We are going to have to adapt and become inventive in everything we do. In Cuba the government got in the way if invention and free thinking. The GND should empower individuals  and communities to identify their vulnerabilities fix them.


Could you provide an example of either?


Thanks
Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 729
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2019, 10:06:23 PM »
They survived austerity and manage to keep an adequate  quality of life. As a result they became stronger ... In a global scale we are going to have to do like Cuba.  We are going to have to adapt and become inventive in everything we do. In Cuba the government got in the way if invention and free thinking. The GND should empower individuals  and communities to identify their vulnerabilities fix them.

The Cuban government may have "got in the way" of some invention and free thinking, but it was also central to the ability of Cuba to deal with intensified sanctions and then the collapse in the Soviet bloc (which removed access to highly subsidized oil imports and a big export market). The move from mechanized and fossil-fuel dependent agriculture to 80%+ organic agriculture was driven by the central government and facilitated by research in government laboratories and extensive localized retraining.

In the documentary below (you can jump past the first 9-10 minutes on peak oil), you can see the extensive actions by the government and the very active engagement with local communities, and the devolution of decision making. It was also helped by the small size and population of Cuba.

A country the size of the US will need the equivalent of war time planning, with government being required to overcome many special interests and force through painful changes so that local communities can become empowered.

https://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/the-power-of-community-how-cuba-survived-peak-oil-2006/

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 187
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2019, 11:06:07 PM »
I remember watching that documentary 10 years ago. I wonder, how did concentrated wealth fare in Cuba during that period?
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1604
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2019, 01:32:51 AM »

Could you provide an example of either?


From the link I posted:

Quote
"You get up at 7 in the morning, and say, ‘Where is there bread? Where do you get milk? Do you know anyone who has this?’ There’s no food in the government stores. Everything has to be hustled by connection, by someone you know or farmers. And most of it can’t be had by legal means.”


So the Cuban government pretends that everyone gets 5 eggs a week, but when people go to get their eggs, they aren't there. So the people illegally hustled food around to feed themselves. Illegal in Cuba, but overlooked by everyone because there simply was no choice.

Although I'm 100% sure than when party members went to get their 5 eggs they got 10.

Quote
Cars, buses and other transportation vehicles are also scarce, and many Cubans illegally convert bicycles into makeshift motorcycles called rikimbilis by attaching small motors. The bikes make a “deafening noise,” Oroza said, and riders seek alternative routes through cities to avoid traffic police. Large boxes welded to trucks become buses and the bottoms of old cars are sealed shut and refashioned as boats, used by defectors.

The government don't want individuals or government independent groups to innovate outside the properly designated areas. But people do anyway.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1604
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2019, 01:44:51 AM »
Quote
For the record, I agree that socialism is no guarantee of low emissions. On the other hand, if your goal is both adequate human welfare and small footprint, I think we will need some system that at least incorporates some aspects of socialism.


Absolutely. the best aspects of socialism, like healthcare, common roads, common security, and government funded science must be maximized with the use of the best data possible. The worst aspects of socialism like immigration laws, control over peoples bedrooms and heads, and a myriad of controls that many times are inefficient and ineffective  must be avoided.

The same is true about capitalism. The best parts of capitalism must be leveraged to grow alternative technologies and lifestyles that are sustainable in the long term. The worst parts of capitalism, namely the cronyism, corruption and severe inequality must be avoided.

We need to do what works to save the most people we can save. If the Green New Deal do not have strong science, logic and freedom based fundamentals it will fail. We can't afford to lose again the fight against climate change again.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1297
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #15 on: February 12, 2019, 02:18:17 AM »
For me " Green Deal " should consider agriculture. Any ideas from AOC ? It is BTW how Cuba got through the crunch.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 729
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2019, 02:57:27 AM »
I remember watching that documentary 10 years ago. I wonder, how did concentrated wealth fare in Cuba during that period?

This is a good take on what happened, differences in income did increase after some of the changes - especially with increases in tourism and remittances. Concentrated wealth is just in its infancy though, with no Russia-style giveaway of state assets to kleptocrats, or the rich Cubans that previously left for Miami etc.

"While professionals like doctors and teachers have very low state salaries, those Cubans who receive remittances from family overseas, tips from tourists, run small businesses, go on government missions abroad, receive CUC bonuses, or sell goods on the black market have much higher purchasing power"

"Cuba prides itself on being the most egalitarian society in Latin America but inequality is not new here. Around 85 percent of the country’s private savings in Cuban pesos are held in around 15 percent of the bank accounts."

"Cuba’s Gini index of income inequality rose from .24 in 1986 to .38 in 2000, according to Havana professor Myra Espina in a paper published in Cuba. Perfect equality would earn a 0 on the index and complete inequality a .99."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cuba-reform-inequality/cuba-grapples-with-growing-inequality-idUSN1033501920080410

Seems that Cuba is starting to go along the China path, although the US sanctions put a damper on the scale of positive outcomes.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/a-new-cuban-revolution-and-the-stark-divide-between-rich-and-poor/article28073917/

Lurk

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 513
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2019, 03:56:44 AM »
For me " Green Deal " should consider agriculture. Any ideas from AOC ? It is BTW how Cuba got through the crunch.

It kind of gets a mention ... see the full doc here
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5731829-Ocasio-Cortez-Green-New-Deal-Resolution

Very broad brush with idealized words little specifics - but that is intentional how they wanted it for now. Will regenerative organic ag and co2 soil sequestration through Ag ever take hold? One mystery of many today Bruce.
Solving Climate Change means changing 'The System' because nothing changes when nothing changes.
Each one of us must consider our deepest values, proceed to act from this standpoint alone, ignoring other voices of illusion, false hope, and distraction that might threaten to throw us off course.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 729
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2019, 07:48:23 PM »
If the GND removed all agricultural subsidies in the US, and charged a realistic carbon tax (US$100+) and/or brought in personal carbon quotas, the level of change could be quite interesting. Would also give a break to farmers in many other countries, as they would stop being destroyed by subsidized US agriculture (the EU does very much the same of course). And of course, ban GMOs and do a RICO investigation of Monsanto/Bayer and other big ag. players.

That would be the basis of a real new deal.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1297
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2019, 05:29:39 AM »
rboyd, I couldn't agree more. The changes you propose would make a real impact on our collective chances of survival , people and many other life forms. I wish the GND set some priorities regarding food production , energy production and equity in that order of importance. The problem is changing our food production would result in increased food costs. Switching to renewables would also ,with current technology ,result in increased prices and although I know addressing equity is necessary I assume the powers that be would gleefully send us all down the river in retribution for taking away their toys and trinkets.
 After a quick scan of the GND i am mostly disappointed . Politics seems to be the primary driver and although making promises to the disadvantaged might appeal to some people I am less than impressed with how their proposal will pan out with the electoral college ,the 2020 presidency ,or Senate control. I have a bad record on predicting election results however.
 After some thought I would like to try to better explain my concept of governance and equity/ fairness.
If our primary goals are preserving access to food and (renewable)energy I believe it needs to be done in a way people think is fair. So you set your goals and try to achieve them in ways all people feel they have as fair a chance as anyone else. Too much of our current system provides unfair advantage to the rich . It is tearing us apart.
 
 
 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 02:11:55 PM by Bruce Steele »

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2142
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 89
  • Likes Given: 89
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2019, 11:08:22 AM »
The New Green Deal is great as a concept.

But let's be clear : To get to a net-zero carbon economy, we are going to need massive additional investment in solar and wind and nuclear and batteries. AND we need to electrify our transportation systems by moving to Electric Vehicles. And change the way we do agriculture.

The New Green Deal will accomplish that by massive ($1 Trillion/year) government funding.

However, that's at a time when government debt is ALREADY increasing by a $ 1 Trillion / year and while unemployment is at an historic low (3.7 %).

Are we all clear about that ?

If so, who will decide who will receive these massive government subsidies, and who will pay for it ?

Wouldn't it (at this time) be smarter to at least NOT work AGAINST renewable energy, and at least UN-DO the damage that Trump has done ? :

For example, lift the trade barrier against imported solar panels, and
Lift the trade barrier against exporting EVs, and
Force utility companies to allow NET-metering for residential solar systems, and
Continue investment-tax credit for solar and wind (and terminate it for oil extraction), and
re-instate carbon emission limits on new power plants with a Clean Power Plan (Obama 2015), and 
re-enforce higher fuel efficiency for vehicles with the (Obama 2012) CAFE standards, and
For once and for all kill off the pipelines that transport ultra-heavy-carbon Canadian tar-sand expansion like the Keystone XL pipeline project (Obama 2015).
Re-instate tax rates for corporations similar to individual rates, and
Make tax on capital gain the same as tax on labor.

You know, common-sense stuff like that....
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 12:20:37 PM by Rob Dekker »
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 189
Re: US Green New Deal
« Reply #21 on: February 15, 2019, 07:29:55 AM »
The Green New Deal Is Absolutely Necessary ft. Mark Blyth (TMBS 77)