U.S. Politics

[mj2sexay]

It's pretty clear you are reacting to headlines from a few publications you follow rather than taking a few minutes to read the proposal.  The actual document says none of what you're up in arms about. 

1.  The central goal is for the U.S. to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Specifically because they dont think they can have that much of an effect on livestock and aviation pollution.

2.  Nowhere in the document does it talk about people who are unwilling or unable to work should get economic security. 

It does however list a goal to create fair paying union jobs in the green and renewable energy industry that guarantee benefits, salaries, and time off.  Things that good paying jobs should have.

1. Net-zero emissions? Ok, we'll all just waive goodbye to air travel.  But hey, those millions of jobs lost when we eliminate coal and nuclear energy as well as aviation get to automatically have other guaranteed jobs because the government will make sure of it.

2. Please read the associated FAQ to this document, which is so pathetic I'd think it was a parody if NPR didn't have the same document readily available. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5729035/Green-New-Deal-FAQ.pdf?platform=hootsuite

3. Solyndra says hi!

EDIT: They actually took the FAQ down! Ahahahahahahaha.

 

[mj2sexay]

I actually hope all of them die.

This held up REAL well.

[SixFeetDeep]

So a couple of bad eggs amongst an organisation that calls out such behaviour is a worse thing than an organisation that at best just ignores it, and in some parts actually uses such attitudes to their advantage? That's a curious perspective on the world, but you do you.

Your use of the term “bad egg” furthers the insinuation that Democrats by nature have no character flaws and conservatives are all racists and rapists. These are politicians we are talking about, most of them are scumbags or idiots regardless of party. Choosing affilitation to the Democratic Party doesn’t automatically make you a good person

[insanity]

1. Net-zero emissions? Ok, we'll all just waive goodbye to air travel.  But hey, those millions of jobs lost when we eliminate coal and nuclear energy as well as aviation get to automatically have other guaranteed jobs because the government will make sure of it.

2. Please read the associated FAQ to this document, which is so pathetic I'd think it was a parody if NPR didn't have the same document readily available. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5729035/Green-New-Deal-FAQ.pdf?platform=hootsuite

3. Solyndra says hi!

EDIT: They actually took the FAQ down! Ahahahahahahaha.

1a.  I'm not following.  No one is touching air travel
1b.  Where are you getting a million jobs from?  Census data shows less the 75k work in the coal industry and it looks like at max 70,000 work at nuclear reaction plants.

2.  Cant comment if its pulled down
3.  Nice call out on Solyndra, but ignore everything else those loans and grants have done for this country.  You know Tesla was funded under the same loans, as well as Ford and their eco drive engine.  You know private banks saw the value in these publicly funded loans and started offering similar loans themselves.  That 5 billion given by Obama, which was slightly above the 4.6 billion bush gave, is responsible for the exponential growth in solar power, wind power, and electric cars in this country.  Although saving 75k high paying g coal jobs is probably a more sustainable and cleaner option. 

I k ow you probably wont read it, but here's a report on some of the short term results Obama's work on clean and renewable energy has done for this country. 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/06/29/435281/americas-clean-energy-success-numbers

[SixFeetDeep]

How will you pay for it?

At the end of the day, this is an investment in our economy that should grow our wealth as a nation, so the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity.

Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.

[Johnny English]

Your use of the term “bad egg” furthers the insinuation that Democrats by nature have no character flaws and conservatives are all racists and rapists. These are politicians we are talking about, most of them are scumbags or idiots regardless of party. Choosing affilitation to the Democratic Party doesn’t automatically make you a good person

That's a really weird interpretation of what I wrote, if you're going to use straw man arguments then go practice on your own somewhere quiet before doing it in public.

[SixFeetDeep]

That's a really weird interpretation of what I wrote, if you're going to use straw man arguments then go practice on your own somewhere quiet before doing it in public.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

[Johnny English]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

What does that have to do with anything being discussed? You're all over the shop here and making no sense.

You're doing a very good impression of one of those "I don't support any particular side of the political spectrum, I just really really enjoy putting the boot in on that one specifically" types.

[mj2sexay]

Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.

It's unbelievable.

1a.  I'm not following.  No one is touching air travel
1b.  Where are you getting a million jobs from?  Census data shows less the 75k work in the coal industry and it looks like at max 70,000 work at nuclear reaction plants.

2.  Cant comment if its pulled down
3.  Nice call out on Solyndra, but ignore everything else those loans and grants have done for this country.  You know Tesla was funded under the same loans, as well as Ford and their eco drive engine.  You know private banks saw the value in these publicly funded loans and started offering similar loans themselves.  That 5 billion given by Obama, which was slightly above the 4.6 billion bush gave, is responsible for the exponential growth in solar power, wind power, and electric cars in this country.  Although saving 75k high paying g coal jobs is probably a more sustainable and cleaner option. 

I k ow you probably wont read it, but here's a report on some of the short term results Obama's work on clean and renewable energy has done for this country. 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/06/29/435281/americas-clean-energy-success-numbers

I'm going to be naturally dismissive when your source material is headed up by freaking NEERA TANDEEN.

I mean, imagine if I tried to bolster my thoughts around here with a think-tank headed by Mitch Mulvaney.

[SixFeetDeep]

What does that have to do with anything being discussed?

Russia has to do with EVERYTHING being discussed

[Pope]

Russia has to do with EVERYTHING being discussed

Find a new slant

[insanity]

It's unbelievable.

I'm going to be naturally dismissive when your source material is headed up by freaking NEERA TANDEEN.

I mean, imagine if I tried to bolster my thoughts around here with a think-tank headed by Mitch Mulvaney.

How about the rest of my points and the fact that the report has 53 citations from government websites...

[insanity]

Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.

So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.

[Badger]

So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.

People usually hide the former behind a façade of the latter.

"hOw ArE yOu GoNnA pAy fOr iT"

[Jumbo]

So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.

Well they have no stated way to pay for it, and keep saying that "it doesn't matter how we pay for it because it's important and will create wealth" without any justification thereof. Except for through Fed-backed inflation, again, which is a dangerous idea.

They also want to do incredibly dumb things such as:
1.) Get rid of nuclear energy in a decade. The most stupid thing so-called environmentalists continue to advocate for that only makes it harder to be energy efficient. It might be possible, but at the rate of progress of energy it seems incredibly unlikely that it would be wise to get rid of it in that short of a time period.
2.) Cap and trade or carbon tax, justifying it because "it's a small part of the deal" while ignoring any adverse impacts.
3.) Guarantee everyone a unionized government job and job training. No idea what those jobs could possibly be and they don't even attempt to provide any examples besides that they'll be Green New Deal jobs, which doesn't mean anything. Maybe they'll pay some people to dig holes and some people to fill in holes. Besides that snark, guaranteed jobs programs don't work long-term.
4.) Continuing and increasing subsidization of whatever clean energy program the government likes. This perverts market incentives and allows for failing projects to continue existing for no real reason.

I've got other issues with the GND but that's the core of it.

Basically, they want to spend a fuckton of money on their pet projects while continually dismissing anyone who questions how they might pay for it with our already incredibly overbloated government budget.

The FAQ is back up here, by the way: https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf