Green New Deal

[baileyn45]

Stop and think about it, building the interstate highway is a joke when compared to totally remaking our entire energy infrastructure and that took 35yrs. What part of that don't people understand?

Why is remaking our energy infrastructure a joke? We’re already doing it, just on a smaller scale!

What nonsense.

The pentagon doesn’t think so. They see global warming as the #1 security threat facing America.

Climate Change Threatens National Security Says Pentagon | UNFCCC

Pentagon is still preparing for global warming even though Trump said to stop

How many times are you going to fall for this crap? The arctic will free of ice by 2003, no wait 2013, no wait 2018, no wait we're all going to die in 12 years.

Who ever said global warming was an exact science? That we know the YEAR the ice caps are going to melt away? How many times are YOU going to fall for THAT crap?

But we know global warming is real because WE CAN see the effects in glaciers melting at an ever increasing rate, extreme weather patterns increasing, our oceans warming AND rising. Whether you like it or not, it is happening and DOING NOTHING.... is not an option.

Sure we had 90% tax rates, and no one paid it. The rich will shift their portfolios like they always do

Not if AOC and progressive democrats are writing the legislation and Bernie is signing them into law.

LOLOL

Second, care to enlighten us how we go carbon neutral in now 11yrs?

We can make fission reactors our moonshot. The science is sound, it’s been proven, it’s only an engineering problem now to keep the reaction sustainable. We need to find, or develop, a material that can withstand the heat produced during the fission reaction. That alone would put us 3/4 of the way there. Other countries would follow the U.S. lead in producing these reactors if we give them the plans or help build them.

We should stop subsidizing big oil and increase subsidies for renewable energy and transportation.

To help get this started we should immediately start taxing the wealthy at 70%.

Why is remaking our energy infrastructure a joke? We’re already doing it, just on a smaller scale!

Do you have any idea what a massive undertaking you're talking about? This isn't something that going to take a decade, we'd do well to accomplish it 50 years.It not just the energy production and distribution systems, you're talking about renovating or rebuilding every structure in the country. And all done using an energy portfolio that doesn't exist.

We can make fission reactors our moonshot. The science is sound, it’s been proven,

I believe you mean fusion, we currently use fission. As has been said about fusion for decades it's fifteen years away and always will be.

We should stop subsidizing big oil and increase subsidies for renewable energy and transportation.

And watch energy prices explode. No one likes big oil, but without it things come to a grinding halt.

To help get this started we should immediately start taxing the wealthy at 70%

The estimates on the 70% bring in 70 bil/yr. From reading the bill that will last about 8 minutes.

 

[baileyn45]

You'll note that the article points to the private sector pushing this along. It's what many of us have said for years, keep the govt out of it. They'll just screw it up.

Has government screwed up the oil industry with subsidies?

The renewable industry has expanded with government subsidies. Same as the oil industry.

Talk to Ray from Cleveland.

Oh I agree that it's all subsidized but let's face it, the plans being put forth are hardly simple subsidies. Not to mention the silly notion of carbon free by 2030. In addition the current slate of renewables just won't do it. Wind and solar aren't going to keep my house livable when it's 10 deg outside and I haven't seen the sun in a month. It's a nice thought just not realistic. Not only the energy itself but the infrastructure is mind boggling. I keep hearing people compare this plan to the lunar mission or the interstate highway, those were minute projects compared to these proposals. I like bold audacious plans but this is just silly, I much prefer realistic.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

• 
  (A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and

(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050​

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Text - H.Res.109 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

OK, 40 - 60% reduction by 2030, 0 by 2050(global? Now that's truly absurd). That's better, still ain't gonna happen. I know it's not mandated but it's an absurd target.

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

This is where I call shenanigans. Must be kept below 1.5deg, based on what? I've listened to this argument ad infinitum and I still have never heard one shred of evidence that supports that doom and gloom. It's an entirely arbitrary number based on models that have proven to be way off and have been issued by bureaucrats at the UN.

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Short on details is an understatement.

The rest of the bill sounds like it should be called the "We're going to create utopia and right all past wrongs and all the children will be above average bill" I like dreaming too, but for heaven's sake.

I do think they left some things out, here's my short list...

All the girls will be pretty
All the boys will be handsome
We're going to colonize Mars
No one will ever be sad
No more disease
Everyone's favorite ball team will win the World Series every year
Everyone gets a flying car
No one has to work more 12 minutes a week
All humanity will live in peace and sing kumbaya
No more war
No more crime
Birds will sing louder and more beautifully
Cats and dogs will get along
Mosquitos will ask permission before biting
Pizza and ice cream won't be fattening
Recreational drugs will plentiful and not harmful
Sex will better than ever
Etc............

What the heck? There will be boys and girls? What happened to gender neutral.

I forgot to add that everyone will be smart, so that nonsense will go away.

 

[francoHFW]

The hell it has worked for the left. The left hasn't gotten anything they want in the last 50 years except ACA and that is sabotaged.

Great....the only thing they wanted and got was based off of lies and f*ed the country...

What ithey wanted was a program designed to fail, the 1st step towards single payer...that will cost between $34-35 TRILLION in new debt over 10 years.

Thank God for them NOT getting everything they wanted or want...

They wanted HLLARY, a corrupt, criminal, self-serving bitch who broke laws, compromised national security, & worked with / paid US-hating foreign spies and Russians to try to help her win in 2016.

They wanted to take down the President with the exposed Conspiracy that has gone for over 2 years...

They wanted to Destroy a good man and his entire life, preventing him from becoming a USSC Justice...

They wanted to pass bills that would allow them to murder infants AFTER THEY HAD BEEN BORN...

THANK GOD THEY GOT NONE OF THAT.

All lies, super duper. .

WTF? Franco...were you dropped on your head recently?

Are you trying to say you DIDN'T want Hillary to win, that you DIDN'T want Single Payer, that you DIDN'T want Kavanaugh to be stopped, that you DIDN'T want Trump to be stopped...

NOW LOOK WHO'S LYING.....

Hillary was not a criminal, just total garbage propaganda. You need three doctors to say the baby is unviable or will kill the mother ....duh. everything you know is wrong

 

[Obejoekenobe]

Republicans support higher taxes on the super-rich, according to a Fox News survey

Oh my goodness looky there.

Head for your prepper bunkers Trumpies.... here comes Venezuela!

Socialism now..... Socialism foreeeeeever.

LOLOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What’s been economically destructive is laissez faire capitalism. That trickle down bullshit has never worked.

List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed

Yeah, with my tax rebate.

What happened to your tax rebate?

 

[francoHFW]

Has government screwed up the oil industry with subsidies?

The renewable industry has expanded with government subsidies. Same as the oil industry.

Talk to Ray from Cleveland.

Oh I agree that it's all subsidized but let's face it, the plans being put forth are hardly simple subsidies. Not to mention the silly notion of carbon free by 2030. In addition the current slate of renewables just won't do it. Wind and solar aren't going to keep my house livable when it's 10 deg outside and I haven't seen the sun in a month. It's a nice thought just not realistic. Not only the energy itself but the infrastructure is mind boggling. I keep hearing people compare this plan to the lunar mission or the interstate highway, those were minute projects compared to these proposals. I like bold audacious plans but this is just silly, I much prefer realistic.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

• 
  (A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and

(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050​

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Text - H.Res.109 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

OK, 40 - 60% reduction by 2030, 0 by 2050(global? Now that's truly absurd). That's better, still ain't gonna happen. I know it's not mandated but it's an absurd target.

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

This is where I call shenanigans. Must be kept below 1.5deg, based on what? I've listened to this argument ad infinitum and I still have never heard one shred of evidence that supports that doom and gloom. It's an entirely arbitrary number based on models that have proven to be way off and have been issued by bureaucrats at the UN.

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Short on details is an understatement.

The rest of the bill sounds like it should be called the "We're going to create utopia and right all past wrongs and all the children will be above average bill" I like dreaming too, but for heaven's sake.

I do think they left some things out, here's my short list...

All the girls will be pretty
All the boys will be handsome
We're going to colonize Mars
No one will ever be sad
No more disease
Everyone's favorite ball team will win the World Series every year
Everyone gets a flying car
No one has to work more 12 minutes a week
All humanity will live in peace and sing kumbaya
No more war
No more crime
Birds will sing louder and more beautifully
Cats and dogs will get along
Mosquitos will ask permission before biting
Pizza and ice cream won't be fattening
Recreational drugs will plentiful and not harmful
Sex will better than ever
Etc............

What the heck? There will be boys and girls? What happened to gender neutral.

I forgot to add that everyone will be smart, so that nonsense will go away.

Well college would be cheap enough so people would be more intelligent, rubes.

 

[baileyn45]

Oh I agree that it's all subsidized but let's face it, the plans being put forth are hardly simple subsidies. Not to mention the silly notion of carbon free by 2030. In addition the current slate of renewables just won't do it. Wind and solar aren't going to keep my house livable when it's 10 deg outside and I haven't seen the sun in a month. It's a nice thought just not realistic. Not only the energy itself but the infrastructure is mind boggling. I keep hearing people compare this plan to the lunar mission or the interstate highway, those were minute projects compared to these proposals. I like bold audacious plans but this is just silly, I much prefer realistic.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

• 
  (A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and

(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050​

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Text - H.Res.109 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

OK, 40 - 60% reduction by 2030, 0 by 2050(global? Now that's truly absurd). That's better, still ain't gonna happen. I know it's not mandated but it's an absurd target.

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

This is where I call shenanigans. Must be kept below 1.5deg, based on what? I've listened to this argument ad infinitum and I still have never heard one shred of evidence that supports that doom and gloom. It's an entirely arbitrary number based on models that have proven to be way off and have been issued by bureaucrats at the UN.

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Short on details is an understatement.

The rest of the bill sounds like it should be called the "We're going to create utopia and right all past wrongs and all the children will be above average bill" I like dreaming too, but for heaven's sake.

I do think they left some things out, here's my short list...

All the girls will be pretty
All the boys will be handsome
We're going to colonize Mars
No one will ever be sad
No more disease
Everyone's favorite ball team will win the World Series every year
Everyone gets a flying car
No one has to work more 12 minutes a week
All humanity will live in peace and sing kumbaya
No more war
No more crime
Birds will sing louder and more beautifully
Cats and dogs will get along
Mosquitos will ask permission before biting
Pizza and ice cream won't be fattening
Recreational drugs will plentiful and not harmful
Sex will better than ever
Etc............

What the heck? There will be boys and girls? What happened to gender neutral.

I forgot to add that everyone will be smart, so that nonsense will go away.

Well college would be cheap enough so people would be more intelligent, rubes.

No college would not be cheap, the costs would just be put on someone else. Besides do we really need more people with gender studies degrees? Lesbian dance theory? Talk about a waste of resources.

 

[easyt65]

Why is remaking our energy infrastructure a joke? We’re already doing it, just on a smaller scale!

On an 11% scale...

What is a joke is AOC's plan to do the impossible using technology that does not exist at a cost she admitted we will never be able to afford...

Democrats have also never understood technology does not drive demand. Demand drives technology.

Electric cars and getting rid of SUVs and muscle cars is a good example. Americans love their SUVs, trucks, & muscle cars....the govt will have to confiscate them, like guns, from citizens' cold dead fingers...

 

[Obejoekenobe]

The hell it has worked for the left. The left hasn't gotten anything they want in the last 50 years except ACA and that is sabotaged.

Great....the only thing they wanted and got was based off of lies and f*ed the country...

What ithey wanted was a program designed to fail, the 1st step towards single payer...that will cost between $34-35 TRILLION in new debt over 10 years.

Thank God for them NOT getting everything they wanted or want...

They wanted HLLARY, a corrupt, criminal, self-serving bitch who broke laws, compromised national security, & worked with / paid US-hating foreign spies and Russians to try to help her win in 2016.

They wanted to take down the President with the exposed Conspiracy that has gone for over 2 years...

They wanted to Destroy a good man and his entire life, preventing him from becoming a USSC Justice...

They wanted to pass bills that would allow them to murder infants AFTER THEY HAD BEEN BORN...

THANK GOD THEY GOT NONE OF THAT.

All lies, super duper. .

WTF? Franco...were you dropped on your head recently?

Are you trying to say you DIDN'T want Hillary to win, that you DIDN'T want Single Payer, that you DIDN'T want Kavanaugh to be stopped, that you DIDN'T want Trump to be stopped...

NOW LOOK WHO'S LYING.....

Hillary was not a criminal, just total garbage propaganda. You need three doctors to say the baby is unviable or will kill the mother ....duh. everything you know is wrong

I like your passion but for what it is worth... you need to stop chasing those white rabbits they toss out and stick to the green economy. They’re distracting you with bullshit because they have nothing to refute the green deal beyond platitudes and whatever crap they dig out of Rush’s ass.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

• It does not specify a date for elimination of fossil fuel. Therefore it is simply long term goal.
• There is no mention of nuclear energy
• There is no mention of eliminating cars or motor vehicles at all
• Gut and rebuild every building in America. - No such requirement
• Air travel is not addressed
• A government-guaranteed job. No, it only mentions high quality good paying jobs, not government
• Free education for life -No mention of free education but provide training, and high-quality education
• Free money - providing economic security does not mean free money
• Ban Meat - your assumption, not in the bill

It appears you have not even bothered to read the bill introduce in congress this year or wouldn't be making such asinine comments.
Here's The Full Text Of Congress' Green New Deal Resolution, Introduced By Rep. Alexandra Ocasio Cortez | CleanTechnica

Bill itself doesn't specify details. Bill is just foot in the door. Just like, for example, Obamacare did initially.

Listen what she's saying, and every time she open's her mouth she confirms one, or several points you listed above. For instance, she run her mouth again about price tag.

Ocasio-Cortez defends $40 trillion price tag for progressive proposals

And just when her supporters defended her by saying it's not government takeover, she actually confirmed that she supports it, and have no problem with that.

How much the cost, and how many lives lost, if we don’t do nothing? I don’t think those wild fires, hurricanes, droughts and floods are going to come cheap.

Right, because we never had those things before the first factory opened up in this country.

Looks like she include in her interview everything she could think of from Medicare for all to Free Colleges to College Loan forgiveness to saving the earth. I would like see what the House Ways and Means Committee does with this bill. I expect it will die in some committee.

When she runs for office, no matter what the problem, she can say she sponsored a bill to fix it. This is hardly even worth discussing.

You are correct, but it just goes to show you where the mindset is and where it's coming from. It may mean little now, but what happens when they finally do get enough power to implement some of these thing? And don't think it can't happen. Just look at Obama's first few years.

Americans need to know what direction each party will take them. They need to understand who supports things like this. We have a party here that wants to make every single American a government dependent, take all the money from the wealthy, kill babies after they are born, bankrupt the nation over global warming, and abolish the one agency that's protecting our country from invaders.

People need to understand these things.

 

[easyt65]

Hillary was not a criminal...

That's not what Comey said when he testified under oath before Congress ... Or when he said publicly she had broken laws and was just too stupid to know she had done it....

And you know it too....so save the lies and BS for the people who really are as dumb as you need them to be to sell than that reality denying BS...

 

[easyt65]

The hell it has worked for the left. The left hasn't gotten anything they want in the last 50 years except ACA and that is sabotaged.

Great....the only thing they wanted and got was based off of lies and f*ed the country...

What ithey wanted was a program designed to fail, the 1st step towards single payer...that will cost between $34-35 TRILLION in new debt over 10 years.

Thank God for them NOT getting everything they wanted or want...

They wanted HLLARY, a corrupt, criminal, self-serving bitch who broke laws, compromised national security, & worked with / paid US-hating foreign spies and Russians to try to help her win in 2016.

They wanted to take down the President with the exposed Conspiracy that has gone for over 2 years...

They wanted to Destroy a good man and his entire life, preventing him from becoming a USSC Justice...

They wanted to pass bills that would allow them to murder infants AFTER THEY HAD BEEN BORN...

THANK GOD THEY GOT NONE OF THAT.

All lies, super duper. .

WTF? Franco...were you dropped on your head recently?

Are you trying to say you DIDN'T want Hillary to win, that you DIDN'T want Single Payer, that you DIDN'T want Kavanaugh to be stopped, that you DIDN'T want Trump to be stopped...

NOW LOOK WHO'S LYING.....

Hillary was not a criminal, just total garbage propaganda. You need three doctors to say the baby is unviable or will kill the mother ....duh. everything you know is wrong

I like your passion but for what it is worth... you need to stop chasing those white rabbits they toss out and stick to the green economy. They’re distracting you with bullshit because they have nothing to refute the green deal beyond platitudes and whatever crap they dig out of Rush’s ass.

All we have to do is read AOC's deal and listen to her interviews on the roll-out...the ravings of a socialist lunatic.

The science is far from settled, as Gore & the fake Climate Change prophets proved. Scare tactics, lies, BS, and cow farts....all the Libtards have.

 

[francoHFW]

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

• 
  (A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and

(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050​

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Text - H.Res.109 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal.

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

OK, 40 - 60% reduction by 2030, 0 by 2050(global? Now that's truly absurd). That's better, still ain't gonna happen. I know it's not mandated but it's an absurd target.

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

This is where I call shenanigans. Must be kept below 1.5deg, based on what? I've listened to this argument ad infinitum and I still have never heard one shred of evidence that supports that doom and gloom. It's an entirely arbitrary number based on models that have proven to be way off and have been issued by bureaucrats at the UN.

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Short on details is an understatement.

The rest of the bill sounds like it should be called the "We're going to create utopia and right all past wrongs and all the children will be above average bill" I like dreaming too, but for heaven's sake.

I do think they left some things out, here's my short list...

All the girls will be pretty
All the boys will be handsome
We're going to colonize Mars
No one will ever be sad
No more disease
Everyone's favorite ball team will win the World Series every year
Everyone gets a flying car
No one has to work more 12 minutes a week
All humanity will live in peace and sing kumbaya
No more war
No more crime
Birds will sing louder and more beautifully
Cats and dogs will get along
Mosquitos will ask permission before biting
Pizza and ice cream won't be fattening
Recreational drugs will plentiful and not harmful
Sex will better than ever
Etc............

What the heck? There will be boys and girls? What happened to gender neutral.

I forgot to add that everyone will be smart, so that nonsense will go away.

Well college would be cheap enough so people would be more intelligent, rubes.

No college would not be cheap, the costs would just be put on someone else. Besides do we really need more people with gender studies degrees? Lesbian dance theory? Talk about a waste of resources.

People seem to need history and political science, and civics, Ethics, sociology

 

[Obejoekenobe]

Democrats have also never understood technology does not drive demand. Demand drives technology.

When we have an urgent need, we’ve always subsidize that technology to meet that need. The atom bomb led to Nuclear reactors.

Apollo program, government subsidized, led to computers and satellites and all that it brought forth.

I’m just glad we have people that can think outside the box and know there is more than one way to grow an economy besides this defeatist attitude that’s infected the MAGA crowd.

Electric cars and getting rid of SUVs and muscle cars is a good example. Americans love their SUVs, trucks, & muscle cars....the govt will have to confiscate them, like guns, from citizens' cold dead fingers...

Better your cold dead fingers than my children’s hot dead future.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What’s been economically destructive is laissez faire capitalism. That trickle down bullshit has never worked.

List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed

Let me explain it too you in GW Bush speak so you understand.

Rich billionaire makes 100 million a year doing whatever.

The little ole socialist in me comes along and snatches say 3/4 of it, i’ll make the math simple so as not confound you.

Billionaire is left with 25 million. Is he going to suffer?

I don’t think so.

Now I take that 75 million and start investing and or subsidizing, renewable energy and our electrical infrastructure, Fission energy development etc.

We start training Joe six-pack to work on this 21st century renewable energy infrastructure. Employment goes up, wages go up and as a result that people are making more money.... they’re spending more money.

Is this good for the economy? Yes it is.

Is this good for the billionaire? I don’t see how it’s not. If the economy is going up and people have more money to spend he can’t BUT HELP make money lest he’s an idiot like Trump.

We can build a green economy for the 21st century. It’s not socialism. It’s just common sense. We just move money we’re spending on old polluting technologies and move it to the green side.

A simple first step?

Institute a carbon tax.

And then raise taxes on the wealthy. They’re not going to miss it and they’ll get it back on the back side of our new economy.

People who make money are not solely in it for the money. Money is just a measure of success.

So you invest all your hard earned money, spend a lifetime creating your product or service, and now you make 10 million a year.

You say the federal government should take 7 million a year. Now what about state and local? That's easily another 15% So now you make 10 million a year, and you end up with 85% of your money confiscated by various governments. Out of that 10 million, you only get 1.5 million depending on your local and state tax rate.

So the question that comes to mind is, was it worth taking all those risks, working all those hours, traveling all over the country or even the world, only to have government take almost all of your money? Would you even go to work tomorrow if you knew you are only going to get 15% of what you earned?

The link I provided earlier explains it best. The wealthy cannot support this country and spending yet alone add trillions more in free college, global warming, and Medicare for all. Read it! The rich have no ability to support all that.

If the federal tax rate were 0%, the federal government would collect 0 dollars. If the federal tax rate were 100%, the federal government would still collect 0 dollars because who would be stupid enough to create wealth?

"Just how much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

 

[Obejoekenobe]

Wtf?

The forum isn’t allowing me to respond to easyt65 !!% comment.

[QUOTE="easyt65, post: 21794548, member: 55400"On an 11% scale...]What is a joke is AOC's plan to do the impossible using technology that does not exist at a cost she admitted we will never be able to afford...[/QUOTE]

In two sentences you both agree the technology exist, on an 11% scale.... and then deny the technology exist and that’s impossible!

 

[Obejoekenobe]

What’s been economically destructive is laissez faire capitalism. That trickle down bullshit has never worked.

List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed

Let me explain it too you in GW Bush speak so you understand.

Rich billionaire makes 100 million a year doing whatever.

The little ole socialist in me comes along and snatches say 3/4 of it, i’ll make the math simple so as not confound you.

Billionaire is left with 25 million. Is he going to suffer?

I don’t think so.

Now I take that 75 million and start investing and or subsidizing, renewable energy and our electrical infrastructure, Fission energy development etc.

We start training Joe six-pack to work on this 21st century renewable energy infrastructure. Employment goes up, wages go up and as a result that people are making more money.... they’re spending more money.

Is this good for the economy? Yes it is.

Is this good for the billionaire? I don’t see how it’s not. If the economy is going up and people have more money to spend he can’t BUT HELP make money lest he’s an idiot like Trump.

We can build a green economy for the 21st century. It’s not socialism. It’s just common sense. We just move money we’re spending on old polluting technologies and move it to the green side.

A simple first step?

Institute a carbon tax.

And then raise taxes on the wealthy. They’re not going to miss it and they’ll get it back on the back side of our new economy.

People who make money are not solely in it for the money. Money is just a measure of success.

So you invest all your hard earned money, spend a lifetime creating your product or service, and now you make 10 million a year.

You say the federal government should take 7 million a year. Now what about state and local? That's easily another 15% So now you make 10 million a year, and you end up with 85% of your money confiscated by various governments. Out of that 10 million, you only get 1.5 million depending on your local and state tax rate.

So the question that comes to mind is, was it worth taking all those risks, working all those hours, traveling all over the country or even the world, only to have government take almost all of your money? Would you even go to work tomorrow if you knew you are only going to get 15% of what you earned?

The link I provided earlier explains it best. The wealthy cannot support this country and spending yet alone add trillions more in free college, global warming, and Medicare for all. Read it! The rich have no ability to support all that.

If the federal tax rate were 0%, the federal government would collect 0 dollars. If the federal tax rate were 100%, the federal government would still collect 0 dollars because who would be stupid enough to create wealth?

"Just how much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

What makes you think taxing them at 70% is going to make them a failure.... when they’re going to make the money back on the back side of a new green economy! AS I’VE ALREADY EXPLAINED!

Do you not think that would also be a measure of success? The wealthy are NOT GOING TO LOSE OUT ON THIS!

All I’m hearing from you Trumpies is rationalizing doing nothing.

And I’ve already told you.... doing nothing is not an option.

WE DON’T HAVE THAT LUXURY.... ANY MORE TO SET AROUND WITH OUR THUMBS UP OUR ASS!

Global warming IS HAPPENING. It is the existential threat OF OUR TIME AND GENERATION. And we BY GOD have to meet this head on and DO WHATEVER IT TAKES to address this.

If it means throwing some billionaires and millionaires on the sacrificial TAX THEIR ASS ALTAR...... then SO BE IT!

If you have a better plan then spill it! Otherwise.... it’s AOC time.

But make no mistake....... one way or the other..... this is going to happen.

 

[baileyn45]

The hell it has worked for the left. The left hasn't gotten anything they want in the last 50 years except ACA and that is sabotaged.

Great....the only thing they wanted and got was based off of lies and f*ed the country...

What ithey wanted was a program designed to fail, the 1st step towards single payer...that will cost between $34-35 TRILLION in new debt over 10 years.

Thank God for them NOT getting everything they wanted or want...

They wanted HLLARY, a corrupt, criminal, self-serving bitch who broke laws, compromised national security, & worked with / paid US-hating foreign spies and Russians to try to help her win in 2016.

They wanted to take down the President with the exposed Conspiracy that has gone for over 2 years...

They wanted to Destroy a good man and his entire life, preventing him from becoming a USSC Justice...

They wanted to pass bills that would allow them to murder infants AFTER THEY HAD BEEN BORN...

THANK GOD THEY GOT NONE OF THAT.

All lies, super duper. .

WTF? Franco...were you dropped on your head recently?

Are you trying to say you DIDN'T want Hillary to win, that you DIDN'T want Single Payer, that you DIDN'T want Kavanaugh to be stopped, that you DIDN'T want Trump to be stopped...

NOW LOOK WHO'S LYING.....

Hillary was not a criminal, just total garbage propaganda. You need three doctors to say the baby is unviable or will kill the mother ....duh. everything you know is wrong

I like your passion but for what it is worth... you need to stop chasing those white rabbits they toss out and stick to the green economy. They’re distracting you with bullshit because they have nothing to refute the green deal beyond platitudes and whatever crap they dig out of Rush’s ass.

Platitudes? Have you read the bill? It's basically a list of platitudes.

 

[Flopper]

Black markets, hyperinflation, and shortages existed in Weimar Republic of the 20's. Under Hitler, Germany experience full employment without the inflation and shortages of the 20's. In fact, the economic success of Germany, primarily due to huge deficits was the envy of all Europe which still languished in the depression.

Germany's economy was improving under Hindenburg and with help of Dawes plan that lowered reparation cost and provided huge loans from US, long before Hitler got power. When US markets crashed, that effected Germany when Hindenburg dissolved the parliament and called for new elections.While campaigning, Hitler offered what every socialist always offers, things listed in party program.

The only characteristic that Nazism shared with socialism is government control but that is far from being unique to socialism. Private ownership, private industry, entrepreneurship, and a strong class structure all existed in Nazi Germany. Capitalism certain existed in Nazi Germany under the watchful eye of Reich. In the mid-1930s, the Nazi regime transferred public ownership to the private sector controlled by the cartels.

Yes. there was private ownership, private industry, who in large part financed Hitler. When National Socialst German Worker's Party got 18% of the vote in election, money started pouring to NSDAP from rich businesses who invested in Hitler in hope to get favors when he get in power, and that's exactly what he was promising to provide when he get in power. He failed to get majority three times in 1932, and Hindenburg refused to name him chancellor, even with those industrialists, bankers, and businessmen send petitions asking him to appoint him. Those petitions paid big for them later when Hitler became chancellor.

Karl Marx, recognized as the father of socialism would have turned over in his grave at hearing Nazism called socialism. In fact, in the 1930's teaching of classic socialism would likely have got you fired if not worse.

As usual, Marx was wrong, as he predicted that socialism will come with proletarian revolution against bourgeoisie, and in industrial countries. How many proletarian revolutions in industrial countries happened? Zero. Also, the Marxist "doctrine" has been claimed to be a democratic one. Only way socialism ever gained power is by using violence to gain control which is not the principle of a democratic doctrine.

I find nothing to disagree with except the last sentence.

When you look at the ten most socialist countries on earth they include Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, Canada, Sweden, Norway, & New Zealand. Are you telling me, the only way socialism ever gained power in these countries was by using violence - didn't happen.

I agree in countries such as Russia, China, North Korea, and Cuba, communism was born out of violence. This is due to the primary difference between communism and socialism. In a communist society, the working class owns everything, and everyone works toward the same communal goal. That means ownership has to be transferred to the government and government has make sure everyone is working toward a common goal and that means violence.

I think it's important to realize that Socialism and it's opposing eco-political system Capitalism exist only in theory. There is no pure socialist country, on earth just as there is no pure capitalist country on earth; that is they are both Utopian ideas. Every socialistic nation is also a capitalist nation because neither is sustainable in their pure form.

Top 10 Most Socialist Countries in the World - Peerform Blog

 

[baileyn45]

There is no requirement for subsidies in bill, although there probably will be.
There is no requirement for carbon free by 2030

OK, 40 - 60% reduction by 2030, 0 by 2050(global? Now that's truly absurd). That's better, still ain't gonna happen. I know it's not mandated but it's an absurd target.

Global temperature (increase) must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require—

This is where I call shenanigans. Must be kept below 1.5deg, based on what? I've listened to this argument ad infinitum and I still have never heard one shred of evidence that supports that doom and gloom. It's an entirely arbitrary number based on models that have proven to be way off and have been issued by bureaucrats at the UN.

In many ways this bill lays out lofty goals but like the Paris Accord is short on details as to what is to be done and how it is to be done.

Short on details is an understatement.

The rest of the bill sounds like it should be called the "We're going to create utopia and right all past wrongs and all the children will be above average bill" I like dreaming too, but for heaven's sake.

I do think they left some things out, here's my short list...

All the girls will be pretty
All the boys will be handsome
We're going to colonize Mars
No one will ever be sad
No more disease
Everyone's favorite ball team will win the World Series every year
Everyone gets a flying car
No one has to work more 12 minutes a week
All humanity will live in peace and sing kumbaya
No more war
No more crime
Birds will sing louder and more beautifully
Cats and dogs will get along
Mosquitos will ask permission before biting
Pizza and ice cream won't be fattening
Recreational drugs will plentiful and not harmful
Sex will better than ever
Etc............

What the heck? There will be boys and girls? What happened to gender neutral.

I forgot to add that everyone will be smart, so that nonsense will go away.

Well college would be cheap enough so people would be more intelligent, rubes.

No college would not be cheap, the costs would just be put on someone else. Besides do we really need more people with gender studies degrees? Lesbian dance theory? Talk about a waste of resources.

People seem to need history and political science, and civics, Ethics, sociology

Gee that'll help with this green new deal. I could be talked into free college for engineers, medical and science in general. Everyone else can spend their own money. Considering the state of the social studies depts ( I refuse to say social science)
we do better without most. We really don't need the "grievance" studies folks. Just dead weight.