Do the board leftists support a $94 trillion dollar green new deal?

[pknopp]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

 

[petro]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

So now you agree with Trump.

 

[pknopp]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

So now you agree with Trump.

No, if you look I've said I support Biden rolling back the tax cuts.

You agree with Trump?

 

[petro]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

So now you agree with Trump.

No, if you look I've said I support Biden rolling back the tax cuts.

You agree with Trump?

One of the things I do disagree with Trump is the added spending.
I would rather see Biden talk of rolling back spending rather than tax cuts.

 

[pknopp]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

So now you agree with Trump.

No, if you look I've said I support Biden rolling back the tax cuts.

You agree with Trump?

One of the things I do disagree with Trump is the added spending.
I would rather see Biden talk of rolling back spending rather than tax cuts.

But Trump did neither and you still supported him. What good is having positions if you aren't going to vote to see that they are done?

 

[Blues Man]

So we should destroy the environment in the approved New Green Deal way by putting up wind mills and solar panels that take up a lot more land

I can see 3 wind mills from where I'm sitting, each takes up about the size of a decent size housing plot. Solar is even simpler. each of us can simply put some up their roof.

nd have a high removal cost due to the hazardous materials they contain.

I'm sorry to tell you, but nearly all products we use today contain quantities of hazardous materials, everything from cell phones to tv's to the cars we drive. The removal cost of the hazardous materials doesn't seem any hindrance to it's use, why is it a problem with solar cells and windmills? Not to mention that the cost of removing those materials that are often recycled pale in comparison to the cost of removing spend fuel rods that have to be stored for in some cases hundreds of thousands of years ( a time scale that makes doing so an effort in futility) in order to be rendered harmless.

At least with my method we still have $93 trillion to spend on hazardous waste cleanup.

That sentence would mean something if. One, someone could explain to me where that number comes from?
Two, someone can explain to me why only the cost of a entire new industry with all it's attended benefits like job creation and profit from producing it, is considered?
Three, someone can explain to me why the cost of not reacting and global sea levels rising and increased droughts, forest fires, etc., etc. seems to be conveniently NOT considered?

It's not so much the disposal as the damage that mining rare earth elements causes.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/boom_in_mining_rare_earths_poses_mounting_toxic_risks

Doesn't it seem a bit shortsighted to pin our future electrical power needs on rare earths that are difficult to mine and have horrid environmental impact?

It seems a little contradictory to "save the planet" by using materials that create toxic sludge dumps.

Depends on what the alternatives are. If there's a clean source of energy that hasn't have any environmental cost associated to manufacturing I haven't heard about it. Until we do, the completely not contradictory way of thinking about it, would be the form of energy that has the least environmental cost.

I think turning many thousands of acres of land into toxic sludge dumps is a pretty high environmental cost.

But hey it's not in our backyard so I guess it's OK.

And let's not forget that we are almost 100% dependent on foreign countries for our supply of rare earth elements.

We need to reinvigorate our nuclear energy program. But once again we are being shortsighted and allowing other countries to research new designs for nuclear reactors.

I do not think we will ever meet our current electrical power needs with windmills, solar panels and batteries. And factor in that as we move from fossil fuels those demands for electricity are going to skyrocket and the future does not look too good if we continue to ignore nuclear power as the best source for abundant reliable and emission free power.

 

[Oddball]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

They'd support human sacrifice if you put a (D) next to it.

 

[pknopp]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

They'd support human sacrifice if you put a (D) next to it.

Look at how long we have been at war. Large numbers of both parties do that.

 

[Oddball]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

They'd support human sacrifice if you put a (D) next to it.

Look at how long we have been at war. Large numbers of both parties do that.

Which refutes the point made how....?

 

[pknopp]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

They'd support human sacrifice if you put a (D) next to it.

Look at how long we have been at war. Large numbers of both parties do that.

Which refutes the point made how....?

I simply added to the post.

 

[bripat9643]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

Nothing to explain because your $94 TRILLION is a BULLSHIT fake number.

That's what the warmist cult members say it will cost, moron.

No that is what you worthless lying scum POS deniers say it will cost.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/green-new-deal-would-cost-93-trillion-or-600g-per-household-study-says​

​

The sweeping "Green New Deal" proposed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., could cost as much as $93 trillion, or approximately $600,000 per household, according to a new study co-authored by the former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.​

How much do you imagine it will cost to rebuild every house in the country?

 

[bripat9643]

Do I approve the idea of forwarding things like investments into renewable energy? Yes.

Your question is far too broad. What you ask about is a huge undertaking and not anywhere close to passing. It should get introduced into the House and debated. The Senate should get a crack at it and so on and so forth and then we can decide what we support and what we do not.

I do not support things like a carbon tax.

So you do support it then. Thanks for exposing your idiocy.

People sure are bitter right now it seems. Left is right and up is down all because you lost an election.

That's the way it's always been with your side. Listen to the assholes who burned down half a dozen cities in the last 4 months. Listen to the assholes who persecuted a Republican president for 4 years.

You assholes really crack me up. You're totally oblivious to reality.

 

[danielpalos]

Just wondering. Explain it to us and how that gets done.

If not, then explain to us why you are against it.

We are waiting.

They'd support human sacrifice if you put a (D) next to it.

Look at how long we have been at war. Large numbers of both parties do that.

Which refutes the point made how....?

Right wingers are worse.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

Quote him.

 

[bripat9643]

Do I approve the idea of forwarding things like investments into renewable energy? Yes.

Your question is far too broad. What you ask about is a huge undertaking and not anywhere close to passing. It should get introduced into the House and debated. The Senate should get a crack at it and so on and so forth and then we can decide what we support and what we do not.

I do not support things like a carbon tax.

What the fuck is "forwarding?" Are you pretending this spending is somehow beneficial to us?

Yes, investing into renewable energy is beneficial.

No isn't. It's pissing money money down a rat hole.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

So now you agree with Trump.

No, if you look I've said I support Biden rolling back the tax cuts.

You agree with Trump?

One of the things I do disagree with Trump is the added spending.
I would rather see Biden talk of rolling back spending rather than tax cuts.

But Trump did neither and you still supported him. What good is having positions if you aren't going to vote to see that they are done?

When did Dims last cut spending?

 

[Theowl32]

I cannot tell. Do they support a $94 trillion dollar green new deal?

BTW, should we include if they support the $14 trillion dollar reparations for blacks that were never slaves? Should oprah and lebron get that money?

Anyway, do they support the $94 trillion dollar green new deal? Can anyone sift through their obfuscation and double talk?

 

[pknopp]

Do I approve the idea of forwarding things like investments into renewable energy? Yes.

Your question is far too broad. What you ask about is a huge undertaking and not anywhere close to passing. It should get introduced into the House and debated. The Senate should get a crack at it and so on and so forth and then we can decide what we support and what we do not.

I do not support things like a carbon tax.

So you do support it then. Thanks for exposing your idiocy.

People sure are bitter right now it seems. Left is right and up is down all because you lost an election.

That's the way it's always been with your side. Listen to the assholes who burned down half a dozen cities in the last 4 months. Listen to the assholes who persecuted a Republican president for 4 years.

You assholes really crack me up. You're totally oblivious to reality.

Lazy generalizations.

 

[pknopp]

Oh really.
Even AOC doesn't agree with you. She claims 10 trillion...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

"I'm not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but ... it's just the fact of the scenario," she said.

www.google.com

As is so typical of the worthless lying scum POS Right, they tell just enough "truth" to deceive, and then shut up.
Here is the WHOLE truth from YOUR own link, "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.
Gee that $10 trillion would be split among 3 (THREE) different programs, so the Green New Deal is NOT costing $10 trillion, like you LIED, but assuming the money is split relatively evenly between the 3 (THREE) programs, then it is around the $3 trillion I pointed out.

A half-truth is a whole lie.
- Yiddish Proverb

Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.
- Seymour Essrog

If you think that all those freebies will only cost three trillion or even 10 trillion, you are a fucking moron.
Then again so is your disgusting hero AOC.
We can't afford any of it.

Trump said debt doesn't matter.

Quote him.

Trump embraces leftist view that deficits don’t matter

What did he do? What a person does is far more important than what they say at that.

 

[pknopp]

Do I approve the idea of forwarding things like investments into renewable energy? Yes.

Your question is far too broad. What you ask about is a huge undertaking and not anywhere close to passing. It should get introduced into the House and debated. The Senate should get a crack at it and so on and so forth and then we can decide what we support and what we do not.

I do not support things like a carbon tax.

What the fuck is "forwarding?" Are you pretending this spending is somehow beneficial to us?

Yes, investing into renewable energy is beneficial.

No isn't. It's pissing money money down a rat hole.

You are arguing to subsidize farriers.