New Green Deal Proposal

[Nebuchadnezzar]

https://ocasio-cortez.house.gov/sites/ocasio-cortez.house.gov/files/Resolution%20on%20a%20Green%20New%20Deal.pdf

This is a link to the actual proposal by AOC

[StrictlyBiz]

Interesting.
Very different version of what I read last week. Is this revised or did I read a doctored document to make her look bad (worse, she already is a nincompoop)?

I've actually caught blurbs that suggest both.

[Millhouse]

And people make fun of Trump voters when there are people that voted her in

[*michaelsean*]

is this like the Contract with America? Like a list of things they'd like to accomplish?

[Benton]

(02-11-2019, 06:40 PM)michaelsean Wrote: s this like the Contract with America?  Like a list of things they'd like to accomplish?

More or less.

I think the idea is to push renewable infrastructure upgrades and direct money there instead of subsidizing oil and coal within a 10 year timeline. 

Some of the stuff is happening already. As much as people want to bring coal back, it's not. The only reason it was used for so long was because it was cheap. That's changing. Same with oil. 

And I'm fine with pushing public dollars to inproving renewables. I don't really agree with tying minorities into it, though. I think it will likely just confuse the issue. Plus, as a general rule, I don't agree with legislating unrelated things in general, like putting tacking on bathroom bills to minimum wage requirements.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

You know this "deal" is toxic when even the far left members of this board can't muster up the nerve to defend it.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 12:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You know this "deal" is toxic when even the far left members of this board can't muster up the nerve to defend it.

Is it gaining traction anywhere? I haven't really seen that much support for it.

Personally, I think that's largely because of the disconnect in interests between what elected Democrats want and what the base wants. I think the majority of Dem voters are looking for a better economy, fixes to healthcare, better schools and better infrastructure. But that gets pushed to the back burner with those in Congress focusing on the environment, minorities and gun violence. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-12-2019, 12:52 PM)Benton Wrote: Is it gaining traction anywhere? I haven't really seen that much support for it.

Personally, I think that's largely because of the disconnect in interests between what elected Democrats want and what the base wants. I think the majority of Dem voters are looking for a better economy, fixes to healthcare, better schools and better infrastructure. But that gets pushed to the back burner with those in Congress focusing on the environment, minorities and gun violence. 

Almost every announced Dem candidate for POTUS has endorsed it.

[BmorePat87]

I haven't read any of the actual proposals yet. Seemed too "DOA" for me to worry about.

[fredtoast]

Green energy is the future. This proposal seems a bit overly broad, but the concept is solid.

Other countries get it. Chine is spending 50 times as much as the US in developing and improving solar panels. When that technology takes over we will be way behind.

[hollodero]

(02-12-2019, 12:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You know this "deal" is toxic when even the far left members of this board can't muster up the nerve to defend it.

I haven't gotten into it, it's not so relevant to me as of now, but every proposal that calls for environmental protection and addressing climate change, and gives those topics priority, is a step in the right direction for me.

Says me, probably the furthest left member of this board.

[*bfine32*]

I stop right about where she stated Global Warming is related to the gender wage gap.

[fredtoast]

(02-12-2019, 06:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I stop right about where she stated Global Warming is related to the gender wage gap.

That is part of what I meant by "over broad".

[hollodero]

(02-12-2019, 06:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I stop right about where she stated Global Warming is related to the gender wage gap.

While others claim it's a Chinese hoax.

But sure. I do know that the woman is a bit overwhelmed and mixes all kinds of topics and pet peeves together, like many young enthusiastic left-leaning people do. But I take accepting the science and drawing some false parallels over denying the science and calling it a ridiculous scam designed to hurt American business all day every day.

And that to me is reason, not ideology.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-12-2019, 05:12 PM)hollodero Wrote: I haven't gotten into it, it's not so relevant to me as of now, but every proposal that calls for environmental protection and addressing climate change, and gives those topics priority, is a step in the right direction for me.

Says me, probably the furthest left member of this board.

I'm all for green energy.  When we had an enormous budget surplus in 2000 I stated we should dump every dime of it into a Manhattan Project style push to develop fusion.  Nuclear fusion would solve an insane number of the world's ills.

However, this "Green Deal" is a nugget of gold buried under a ton of manure.  It's essentially free everything for everyone.  I love the line about supporting those who cannot work (certainly laudable) or those who refuse to work (certainly laughable).  The line was so inane that even AOC recognized this and had the offending statement removed.  The United States did not become the most powerful nation in history by embracing pie in the sky socialism.  Our style of capitalism certainly leaves much to be desired, and can certainly be tweeked, this proposal is essentially advocating that we destroy the fabric of the nation down to it's foundation and rebuild it into something that's never worked in human history.  Quite simply it's emblematic of what's wrong with the left these days, rebuild the US from scratch and free stuff!

[*bfine32*]

(02-12-2019, 07:25 PM)hollodero Wrote: While others claim it's a Chinese hoax.

But sure. I do know that the woman is a bit overwhelmed and mixes all kinds of topics and pet peeves together, like many young enthusiastic left-leaning people do. But I take accepting the science and drawing some false parallels over denying the science and calling it a ridiculous scam designed to hurt American business all day every day.

And that to me is reason, not ideology.

There's nothing scientific about relating Climate change to Gender wage gap. 

IMO everyone in the climate change category should be slamming, not justifying this document. It only emboldens those that dispute the phenomenon. I think Pelosci was even smart enough to ridicule it. 

[GMDino]

(02-12-2019, 07:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There's nothing scientific about relating Climate change to Gender wage gap. 

IMO everyone in the climate change category should be slamming, not justifying this document. It only emboldens those that dispute the phenomenon. I think Pelosci was even smart enough to ridicule it. 

Once again you are close to right...but for the wrong reason.

Because there is something, anything, in there that can be pointed out as ridiculous then people who don't want to do anything about climate change can say we should ignore the whole thing.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if you will.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 01:16 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Almost every announced Dem candidate for POTUS has endorsed it.

Which is ok. Out of the half dozen or so that say they're going to run, none of them are likely. I wouldn't put good money on Harris or that one from Minnesota at this point. Booker won't make it. Warren's out.

I think the Democrats will eventually realize they don't have a choice: the majority of voters are largely going to vote for an old white guy. Having a minority candidate only works when it's a strong candidate.

[Millhouse]

Not many years ago, I considered myself a moderate or a centrist that leaned a little to the left on things and to the right on others.

However with the emergence of those on the left like the socialist bartender from New York that wants to give everything free to everyone, I find myself basically moving towards the right by default. I will take Trump and his idiotic things he tweets about any day over the likes like her and others that seem to be part of that 'socialist' movement on the left. I will take the 8 years under Obama as well.

Anyways, ones like her and the other radicals are dangerous for this country in the long run, even more dangerous than Trump is.

[*bfine32*]

(02-12-2019, 08:29 PM)GMDino Wrote: Once again you are close to right...but for the wrong reason.

Because there is something, anything, in there that can be pointed out as ridiculous then people who don't want to do anything about climate change can say we should ignore the whole thing.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if you will.

Dang! I was so close to being right