[OFFICIAL] Green New Deal Thread

Feinstein and other illiberals will never recognize the pot they left on the stove for 30 years beginning to boil over.

She gets to exit stage left because it doesn’t make one bit of difference to her — the next generation will deal with this.

The fact that no Democrat seems bothered by a freshman representative who calls out her fellow Democrats, participates sit-in protests in the House Speaker’s office, runs corporations out of town because of “corporate welfare”, wants to pass economically crippling environmental laws, and reduces economic issues down to Marxist-labor theory wrapped in good old-fashion identity politics, seems just about right to me.

They really lack the backbone to take control of their own party. How can they lead the country if they can’t lead their own party?

 

Great, cut the unnecessary military spending and we can have that Green New Deal.

DD

 

yea, I saw it being touted on the Daily Caller extreme right wing news site (guess your source). Still a right wing site, and I don't understand how a non-binding resolution that can't become law should cost anything. But hey, if the Daily Caller says so...

 

I don't know how much a former Radio Shack store manager knows on climate science and politics (ok, he also worked at Kofax... a market leader in document imaging SW), but sure...

 

I always look at the source, to understand their qualifications and their (possible) biases. That way I can then have a better understanding, not just what they are telling me, but also why.

For example, the tobacco industry used to trot out scientists to support their positions. I am sure the scientists were well qualified on the science behind tobacco use, but if they were paid by the tobacco industry, it was very possible (likely, in fact) that they were bending/breaking the truth.

Now fast forward to climate science...

 

Here, here.

 

True. Only posted that to highlight the ridiculous nature of the stated goal in the GND. Ridiculous goals lead to ridiculous proposals to achieve them.

All fair points. As for costing us twice...its worse than that. First, the government would need to buy up the old plants. Then, they'd need to pay to deocmmission them. One of the man reasons these power plants stick around is because of the exorbitant cost of getting rid of them...so that may be several factors higher than the initial cost of buying them.

It IS valuable. One of the benefits of nuclear power is that it never shuts down. So, the power grid uses that power as the steady baseline. In the GND...that goes away. So...where does the power come from when the sun is down, and the wind isn't blowing? Those choices make good additional power sources....but have significant issues as the primary sources due to their variability. One of the MANY MANY issues the GND simply ignores. It's a marketing scheme, with no substance to it.

 

One of the more important political aspects is AOC apparently questioning whether people should have children:

“There’s scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: is it okay to still have children?”
—@AOC

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/v...okay-to-have-children-because-climate-change/

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/02...d-climate-crisis-whether-okay-still-children/

Now, maybe she is not saying "don't have children" -- but maybe she is; and it's going to be spun that way.

She is going to lose (or could very well lose) support across many sides of the political spectrum with this one.

I tend to think she's untouchable in her seat -- but if she keeps this kind of stuff up -- maybe not.

 

Its true that the market is already progressing on many of the things we want for carbon policy. I wouldn't say the government isn't involved -- they're always involved. They set efficiency standards for cars, they set renewable portfolio standards for electricity. There are lots of levers right now that nudge industries in public policy direction, and everyone is still making money. And, especially in the case of electricity, the whole market is a construct that could not exist without an organizing regulatory body. So, if we think that we need progress on carbon policy faster (and I think we do), we can use these levers to push harder for change. The GND is an aspirational resolution that doesn't say much about the how, which is what worries me about it. But, I also think it's too simplistic to say the free market will take care of it -- government needs to be a partner that lays the incentives to get the right behaviors from the market.

 

Why shouldn't you question the source?

Do you believe everything you read and hear?

I can't believe you even made that statement.

 

LMAO
Which Party does this describe most?

Rocket River

 

There, there.

 

Is asked if they are a vegan: **screeches** quit asking for the impossible!

Is asked about the Green New Deal: **also screeching** overhauling the entire nation’s fossil fuel infrastructure is totally possible!

I have given up on understanding certain people.