U.S. Politics

[Pope]

Wondering how many people got excited to hear about the “unwilling to work” but paid anyway bit.

[insanity]

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

"hOw ArE yOu GoNnA pAy fOr iT"

Exactly my point

[Pope]

Exactly my point

To be fair that’s a very legitimate question.

[insanity]

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

So, I'll start this off by saying I'm not even necessarily for gnd.  I do think that we should be investing more in renewables for two reasons. 

1.  We need to counteract global warming yesterday
2.  We need to create an industry which can bring in new jobs.  This can do that.

Regarding the GND, I don't get why they want to move away from nuclear.  I also get that there are cobra effects to carbon taxes, but I do think it's the right way to go at least for the time being (was this part of the GND?). 

The reason why I asked my questions about if you (not you specifically) are against what the GND is trying to accomplish or how they plan to pay for it is because the GND, as I understand it, is not supposed to provide the how it gets done, it's supposed to provide the what are we trying to accomplish and why we are trying to accomplish it. 
The government cant, and shouldn't move to the why until they have agreement that things need to change.  Case in point, Trump has brought coal to the global clean energy summit as a solution to climate change and has been laughed at each time by the world.

In my eyes the GND at least gives a starting point for discussion.  Which I think is needed.

[insanity]

I promise I'm not an AOC stan, but everyone needs to watch this.  This is what government should be about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AljakpXAh7c

[Jumbo]

So, I'll start this off by saying I'm not even necessarily for gnd.  I do think that we should be investing more in renewables for two reasons. 

1.  We need to counteract global warming yesterday
2.  We need to create an industry which can bring in new jobs.  This can do that.

Regarding the GND, I don't get why they want to move away from nuclear.  I also get that there are cobra effects to carbon taxes, but I do think it's the right way to go at least for the time being (was this part of the GND?). 

The reason why I asked my questions about if you (not you specifically) are against what the GND is trying to accomplish or how they plan to pay for it is because the GND, as I understand it, is not supposed to provide the how it gets done, it's supposed to provide the what are we trying to accomplish and why we are trying to accomplish it. 
The government cant, and shouldn't move to the why until they have agreement that things need to change.  Case in point, Trump has brought coal to the global clean energy summit as a solution to climate change and has been laughed at each time by the world.

In my eyes the GND at least gives a starting point for discussion.  Which I think is needed.

If the GND is all about solving climate change, why is there a guaranteed jobs and income program involved? It's a very disingenuous way to """start a discussion.""" AOC threw all these ideas out there without a stated way to fund any of it and still somehow got support from a lot of major Dems, including all the senators running for prez. I am pretty concerned that politicians now can fund their pet projects through the lens of climate change whether that would actually help the problem or not - case in point, wanting to move away from nuclear in support of other programs the base finds more palatable. That actually hurts the problem, but boy oh boy do they care, and that's what's important.

Cap and trade and carbon taxes are explicitly talked about in the FAQ I linked in my other post.

[SixFeetDeep]

I promise I'm not an AOC stan, but everyone needs to watch this.  This is what government should be about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AljakpXAh7c

AOC was broke before/after being elected this past fall. Let’s check back in on her net worth in a few years.

[SixFeetDeep]

“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

[mj2sexay]

“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

BuT hOw aRe wE gOiNg To PaY fOr iT.

Imagine asking that question like it doesn't matter.

Hahahawhatthefuckiseconomicshahahajustprintmoneyyyy

[insanity]

If the GND is all about solving climate change, why is there a guaranteed jobs and income program involved? It's a very disingenuous way to """start a discussion."""

There isnt any mention of that in the deal

[insanity]

AOC was broke before/after being elected this past fall. Let’s check back in on her net worth in a few years.

Jesus christ you guys are the worst.  Your response to doing something good is, "well let's see if she's still not corrupt at the end of the year"
How about we applaud someone who cares about getting limiting corruption for both parties?

[insanity]

“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

Every building should be updated to improve carbon emissions.  It is a goal to work towards.  It probably wont happen

[insanity]

BuT hOw aRe wE gOiNg To PaY fOr iT.

Imagine asking that question like it doesn't matter.

Hahahawhatthefuckiseconomicshahahajustprintmoneyyyy

Again the goal of this deal is to get people to agree that climate change is real and there is a need for more reliability on renewable resources and clean energy.

You my notice that there isnt any plan for how much money is needed to pay for this because that's not the point of the deal.  That needs to get negotiated across the aisle with priorities of each party.

I dont know what you do for work, but large businesses dont just pitch internal goals with a lost of how each goal is going to be accomplished.  You pitch the goal to your team then you figure out how to do it and adjust the goal based on feasibility.

[Jumbo]

There isnt any mention of that in the deal

Why do you keep saying things aren't mentioned in the deal when they clearly are?

https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf

It's on the first and last pages and continually brought up throughout this document

[Johnny English]

“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

"Re-design, re-build or replace every single piece of software ever created, and do it in the next five years." An impossible project requiring vast expenditure of time and resources which would almost certainly bankrupt entire industries. But we did it and it played a significant part in creating huge amounts of wealth and success.

Infrastructure investment is a hugely valuable exercise. You saying "anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is" demonstrates your lack thereof. Enforced change is a catalyst for innovation and re-invention.