Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Releases Green New Deal Outline

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
5,537
1,904
1,000
#1
https://www.npr.org/2019/02/07/6919...ocasio-cortez-releases-green-new-deal-outline

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., think they have a start to a solution. Thursday they are introducing a framework defining what they call a "Green New Deal" — what they foresee as a massive policy package that would remake the U.S. economy and, they hope, eliminate all U.S. carbon emissions.


What are the specifics of that framework?

The bill calls for a "10-year national mobilizations" toward accomplishing a series of goals that the resolution lays out.

Among the most prominent, the deal calls for "meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources." The ultimate goal is to stop using fossil fuels entirely, Ocasio-Cortez's office told NPR, as well as to transition away from nuclear energy.

In addition, the framework, as described in the legislation as well as a blog post and "FAQs" from Ocasio-Cortez's office, calls for a variety of other lofty goals:

  • "upgrading all existing buildings" in the country for energy efficiency;
  • working with farmers "to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions ... as much as is technologically feasible" (while supporting family farms and promoting "universal access to healthy food");
  • "Overhauling transportation systems" to reduce emissions — including expanding electric car manufacturing, building "charging stations everywhere," and expanding high-speed rail to "a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary";
  • A guaranteed job "with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations and retirement security" for every American;
  • "High-quality health care" for all Americans.
Full document: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5729033/Green-New-Deal-FINAL.pdf
 
Last edited:
Mar 3, 2014
1,939
487
305
#3
Why no list of lowlights? I'll start:
-upgrade or replace every building in the US for state-of-the-art energy efficiency
-build up high speed rail on a scale that makes air travel unnecessary
-guaranteed great jerbs for every American
-"We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.". (This is in there, verbatim.)
-plans to end the use of not only fossil fuels, but nuclear

AOC's got jokes.
 
Feb 21, 2018
3,020
1,944
300
#6
This is the democratic platform.

Promise everything and pie in the sky it will be paid for. Just tax "rich" people and somehow the money will magically appear.

I mean some of these goals are good in nature and make sense. But then we get to the loony stuff.

Get rid of the airline industry? Wasn't there huge bail outs of the industry to save jobs? So essentially 1000's of American's out of jobs for a less efficient way of travel?

And how do you gurantee high paying jobs for every American. I remember another country that had guranteed jobs for everyone.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
5,537
1,904
1,000
#7
Why no list of lowlights? I'll start:
-upgrade or replace every building in the US for state-of-the-art energy efficiency
-build up high speed rail on a scale that makes air travel unnecessary
-guaranteed great jerbs for every American
-"We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.". (This is in there, verbatim.)
-plans to end the use of not only fossil fuels, but nuclear

AOC's got jokes.
And throw in free healthcare for everyone. If you don’t have to explain how to pay for anything why not.
 
Oct 1, 2006
3,050
2,361
1,090
#8
Why no list of lowlights? I'll start:
-upgrade or replace every building in the US for state-of-the-art energy efficiency
-build up high speed rail on a scale that makes air travel unnecessary
-guaranteed great jerbs for every American
-"We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.". (This is in there, verbatim.)
-plans to end the use of not only fossil fuels, but nuclear

AOC's got jokes.
It's all lowlights. Replacing 100% of the energy grid of the US with non-nuclear renewable energy? Absolutely laughable.

Dems need to kick this Luddite nuclearphobia bullshit - it's the only energy tech that actually works without literal states worth of land being filled with maintenance-hog solar panels and bird blenders.
 
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2011
8,822
592
585
#9
3) global warming at or above 2 degrees Celsius be-yond preindustrialized levels will cause— (A) mass migration from the regions most af-fected by climate change; (B) more than $500,000,000,000 in lost annual economic output in the United States by the year 2100; (C) wildfires that, by 2050, will annually burn at least twice as much forest area in the western United States than was typically burned by wildfires in the years preceding 2019; (D) a loss of more than 99 percent of all coral reefs on Earth; (E) more than 350,000,000 more people to be exposed globally to deadly heat stress by 2050; and (F) a risk of damage to $1,000,000,000,000 of public infrastructure and coastal real estate in the United States
Citation needed.

Just read that actual bill, it sounds word for word like someone who really doesn't understand what their doing. It's suggestion after suggestion with no means of how to pull it off. She just suggests what should be done without saying what she's going to do to make it happen. Taxing the rich won't help unless she starts taxing them %50 of their wages. Like, even in 10 years time, it's not financially feasible to do even half the things she's asking. A lot of what she suggest is normally done by interested business and not the government. Does she think we have unlimited money or something?

That's not even going with replacing everything with non-nuclear renewable energy. Which sources? Wind? Do you know how many wind farms are needed to produce enough energy for a single city and how much it costs just to do it? Water? Not everywhere has a source and electric companies that use water tends to tax the shit out of people (at least in Ohio). Thermal? You'd have to do some digging and cracking and even then, few places can provide thermal. Solar? Solar panel technology is expensive, and doesn't store enough power to power multiple cities, and cities like Seattle and Cincinnati, where there are more cloudy days than sunny ones, will have issues.

Even THEN, there is nothing wrong with Nuclear energy. It's clean running, cheaper than the other options and safer than people think. The fact that she doesn't know that tells me all I need to know about her ideas of "clean energy".
 
Last edited:
Likes: Tygeezy
Sep 4, 2018
1,815
1,738
235
#11
we definitely need some high speed rail. it's frustrating as hell that i can't hop on a train from Atlanta to Athens or Savannah. whenever i'm in Europe visiting friends i am always jealous how easy it is to get around.

alot of this sounds great. personally i am sick of the whole "climate change is the single most important issue of our lifetimes" hype but all these changes would rule.

i'm especially glad she wants to transition away from nuclear power, it's been scary seeing so many centrists and liberals touting the supposed safety of nuclear power when we still have no idea what to do in the event of a disaster.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,788
3,484
460
#12
I mean I support a lot of what she wants, but the only way we would do a quarter of what she wants would be throwing bodies at it like how China gets their projects done. And I don't think Americans can stomach big infrastructure projects anymore like we did back in our heyday. It takes a decade to rebuild a 10 mile stretch of highway these days. Building a modern rail network might take a few generations. And most of the people unemployed right now are not the kind who will take a job to go out and start building roads and railroads. They are too lazy.

I mean we could throw immigrants at the meatgrinder these big projects would be though. I just hope she is willing to turn a blind eye to some collateral damage like we used to.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
35,104
597
1,135
Best Coast
#14
we definitely need some high speed rail. it's frustrating as hell that i can't hop on a train from Atlanta to Athens or Savannah. whenever i'm in Europe visiting friends i am always jealous how easy it is to get around.
The rest of the world has a lot better transportation options, especially Europe and Asia. For some reason, it's more expensive to do similar projects in the USA.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2014/0...ture-projects-cost-way-more-they-should/8799/

https://www.citylab.com/transportat...pensive-to-build-urban-rail-in-the-us/551408/

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/09/why-so-costly/
 
Oct 1, 2006
3,050
2,361
1,090
#15
we definitely need some high speed rail. it's frustrating as hell that i can't hop on a train from Atlanta to Athens or Savannah. whenever i'm in Europe visiting friends i am always jealous how easy it is to get around.

alot of this sounds great. personally i am sick of the whole "climate change is the single most important issue of our lifetimes" hype but all these changes would rule.

i'm especially glad she wants to transition away from nuclear power, it's been scary seeing so many centrists and liberals touting the supposed safety of nuclear power when we still have no idea what to do in the event of a disaster.
Have fun maintaining a solar grid the size of Alaska!
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,788
3,484
460
#17
The rest of the world has a lot better transportation options, especially Europe and Asia. For some reason, it's more expensive to do similar projects in the USA.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2014/0...ture-projects-cost-way-more-they-should/8799/

https://www.citylab.com/transportat...pensive-to-build-urban-rail-in-the-us/551408/

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/09/why-so-costly/
It is more expensive to do a lot of things in America. We love our bureaucracy just as much as the Russians.
 
Oct 1, 2006
3,050
2,361
1,090
#18
Well AOC keeps talking about taxing rich people 70%.

But we all know the wealthy are not going to give up 70% of their income, they will just take it somewhere else or find ways to hide it.
What is the point of taxes with the debt that this would produce? Seizing all wages over minimum wage couldn't pay for this. The solar/wind thing is particularly laughable. She is a fool.
 
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2011
8,822
592
585
#20
Well AOC keeps talking about taxing rich people 70%.

But we all know the wealthy are not going to give up 70% of their income, they will just take it somewhere else or find ways to hide it.
Even then that wouldn't be enough to pay for half of what she is asking.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,788
3,484
460
#21
Do you really want to use the argument that the trillions in debt this will waste is fine because of the trillions wasted by the wars? We would probably get to -$70T trying to implement this shit.

No amount of taxes would pay for this fantasy.
-70 trillion would be fine. We would see an economic boom like we never have with all that money being injected into the economy. It isn't like government spending doesn't boost the economy. But as I said, we don't have enough workers to do this type of project.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Mihos

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
35,104
597
1,135
Best Coast
#22
Do you really want to use the argument that the trillions in debt this will waste is fine because of the trillions wasted by the wars? We would probably get to -$70T trying to implement this shit.

No amount of taxes would pay for this fantasy.
I'm using the argument that we always get "oh noes the sky is falling" complaints for stuff that might actually benefit the country, while congress simultaneously calls our president a huge threat to world security while also granting him billions of dollars for his military without blinking an eye, and no one ever asks how we'll pay for it.

Billions of dollars added to the deficit for foreign wars: "sure go ahead"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for tax cuts (although it's very complicated since you can argue that it increased revenues in other sectors to offset) : "yea no big deal"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for health care for all Americans that while would cost the government money, actually save individuals money and their lives: "But how will we pay for it??? oh noes"
 
Dec 18, 2010
8,111
769
660
51
washington d.c.
#23
It’s all really noble and very high level from a moral/green perspective. It reads like more of a wish list than a pragmatic plan though.

I like AOC, she’s energetic and a breath of fresh air in many ways, but I’m dumbfounded that democrats are still trying to sell the pie in the sky platform. Anybody can have big ideas, but you have to show how you’re going to implement them beyond taxing the wealthy. It’s why a businessman has been able to get things done, Trump at least understands that there’s a balance between big ideas and actually implementing them in a way that will work.
 
Oct 1, 2006
3,050
2,361
1,090
#24
I'm using the argument that we always get "oh noes the sky is falling" complaints for stuff that might actually benefit the country, while congress simultaneously calls our president a huge threat to world security while also granting him billions of dollars for his military without blinking an eye, and no one ever asks how we'll pay for it.

Billions of dollars added to the deficit for foreign wars: "sure go ahead"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for tax cuts (although it's very complicated since you can argue that it increased revenues in other sectors to offset) : "yea no big deal"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for health care for all Americans that while would cost the government money, actually save individuals money and their lives: "But how will we pay for it??? oh noes"
You are off by an order of magnitude there.

And I am all for slashing the military, but that money is still a drop in the bucket compared to this or UHC in the US.
 
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2011
8,822
592
585
#31
I'm using the argument that we always get "oh noes the sky is falling" complaints for stuff that might actually benefit the country, while congress simultaneously calls our president a huge threat to world security while also granting him billions of dollars for his military without blinking an eye, and no one ever asks how we'll pay for it.

Billions of dollars added to the deficit for foreign wars: "sure go ahead"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for tax cuts (although it's very complicated since you can argue that it increased revenues in other sectors to offset) : "yea no big deal"
Billions of dollars added to the deficit for health care for all Americans that while would cost the government money, actually save individuals money and their lives: "But how will we pay for it??? oh noes"
I get what you're saying but that doesn't change the fact that we can't afford all of what she wants while trying to pay off what we already have because of said wars and tax cuts. Even over the course of 10 years we can't push this. Again, which energies is she even thinking of doing? While they have gotten better over the years, sources like solar and wind still aren't good enough to actually be a feasible solution. Nuclear is nowhere near as dangerous as people think and the fact that she doesn't know this tells me her research on the subject of clean energies is far too basic.

Einstein understood the concept that there are a 1000 billions in 1 trillion, though. Something AOC lacks.
Umm... details needed please.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,519
7,671
825
Australia
#32
lol she wants to have 100% renewables in 10 years? Is that right? How did that go for Melbourne? Constant blackouts and energy bills through the roof.

This just reads like a laundry list of shit she dreamed up at her bartending job. Expanding high-speed rail to a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary? LOL even the wording of that is retarded: “stops becoming necessary”.

Expecting ssolitare to do his you-go-girl-haters-gonna-hate routine.
 
Oct 1, 2006
3,050
2,361
1,090
#37
I get what you're saying but that doesn't change the fact that we can't afford all of what she wants while trying to pay off what we already have because of said wars and tax cuts. Even over the course of 10 years we can't push this. Again, which energies is she even thinking of doing? While they have gotten better over the years, sources like solar and wind still aren't good enough to actually be a feasible solution. Nuclear is nowhere near as dangerous as people think and the fact that she doesn't know this tells me her research on the subject of clean energies is far too basic.



Umm... details needed please.
She implicitly does not understand magnitudes of cost. She's like an irresponsible person shopping - "What's the difference between $10 and $100? It's just another 0!"
 
Jan 13, 2018
568
755
245
#41
Expanding high-speed rail to a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary? LOL even the wording of that is retarded: “stops becoming necessary”.
Even I can admit, that does sound kinda stupid lol.

I'm anxious to see Kyle Kulinski's breakdown of this (Secular Talk). This is one of his biggest platform talking points and he's one of the founders of Justice Democrats.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,519
7,671
825
Australia
#42
Even I can admit, that does sound kinda stupid lol.

I'm anxious to see Kyle Kulinski's breakdown of this (Secular Talk). This is one of his biggest platform talking points and he's one of the founders of Justice Democrats.
You normally a fan of her? I feel like people are getting sucked in to Hope and Change^TM because she’s young and pretty, but a little bit of scrutiny reveals her and her ideas as much less than half-baked.
 

Musky_Cheese

Community Liaison
Oct 23, 2016
3,930
5,117
625
#44
You normally a fan of her? I feel like people are getting sucked in to Hope and Change^TM because she’s young and pretty, but a little bit of scrutiny reveals her and her ideas as much less than half-baked.
Oh yeah. Her ideas are completely shit. And they are exposed as shit before people really even look into them

But she has social media accounts and apparently that's priority for people who are heavily politically focused
 
Likes: matt404au