Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dragdeler]

-

[dragdeler]

-

[Reelya]

The problem with the Green New Deal is that they tacked a large amount of stuff on there that has nothing to do with climate change, and are things that actually work against the stated goals. Free college, increasing medical services and increasing wages are all things that, while nice, drive the standard of living up thus making the USA and even more energy-hungry place than it is already. Livable wage = increased resource consumption. Even the poorest Americans (barring homelessness which is much driven by mental illness, addiction) have a standard of living that would be considered comfortable middle class in much of the world, so the GND livable wage really means livable compared to the more relatively well-off Americans not compared to how the average schmuck lives globally, and that goal would specifically increase demands for energy, food, resources, in the USA.

Especially the whole 'free college' thing. Putting that in is like a hand-grenade you put in on purpose to make sure that nobody will actually support your bill, and you can claim the moral highground while not having to actually deliver. It's not something you include in your bill if you realistically want it to be passed.

And the 'free college' proviso in the GND is literally holding the environment to ransom to get everything you want. Sure, it's a reasonable thing to fight for, by itself, but it's not reasonable to tack that on as a non-negotiable on an environmental protection bill then accuse the other side (and people on your own side you wish to replace with your own brand of Pod People) of malfeasance for not supporting the whole thing. If the claim is, rightly, that it's desperate that we pass environmental protection bills ASAP then it makes no sense to put things in there which are basically ultimatums of the scale of the Austrian WWI ultimatums to Serbia, deliberately going too far to actually get passed. In this respect, the GND isn't a realistic thing that was supposed to get passed, it was a Cassus Belli against the mainstream to push radleft economics by dressing them up as an environment issue. Sure, fight for those things, but don't tack them onto an environment bill then claim everyone else is against the environment when the bill doesn't pass.

[dragdeler]

-

[Reelya]

My point was specifically about all the GND aspects which have nothing to do with conversion.

    "Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States."
    "Providing all people of the United States with – (i) high-quality health care; (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing; (iii) economic security; and (iv) access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature."
    "Providing resources, training, and high-quality education, including higher education, to all people of the United States."

While noble aims, none of this helps the environment in the slightest.

A lot of the goals have strong downsides. Firstly guaranteed a job is going pretty far. not even the most socially minded European nations have that. Any anywhere that has it, the whole idea kind of sucks balls. Bureaucrats shoe-horn you into some low paid job (that by definition pays less than any private industry job so as not to kill off the labor supply completely) whether you want it or not. But, AOC voters clearly won't be the ones doing these job, will they? Her highly educated college-graduate voter set would likely never be forced into working one of these guaranteed jobs; those are for the poor plebs. It'll basically end up turning into a forced work program for inner city blacks overseen by an administration of petty bureaucrats. The social strata who voted AOC in likely includes a lot of humanities college graduates, the type who would end up as managers of this type of program.

The economic policy stance currently dominant around the world uses unemployment as a policy tool to control inflation; when inflation rises, the government pursues contractionary fiscal or monetary policy, creating a buffer stock of unemployed people, reducing wage demands, and ultimately inflation. When inflationary expectations subside, expansionary policy aims to produce the opposite effect. In Marxian terms, the unemployed serve as a reserve army of labor. By contrast, in a job guarantee program, a buffer stock of employed people (employed in the job guarantee program) provides the same protection against inflation without the social costs of unemployment, hence potentially fulfilling the dual mandate of full employment and price stability.

This guarantee of a state job will quickly turn into a "don't work, don't eat" type scenario which will in itself be demeaning. You'd have a layer of petty bureaucrats telling you what to do and where to work. It wouldn't be the rosy ideal situation it's made out to be.

There are also the ideas of getting rid of all gasoline cars and bringing in electric vehicles within 10 years, along with public transport. First, public transport is only more energy efficient if the rides are sufficiently full, so it's not a panacea for all cities in the USA. AOC is promoting solutions which are very suited to New York, not necessarily all cities, so she may be preaching specifically to the demographic who voted her in, rather than solutions that address the needs of all Americans. for example promising free college and cheaper public transport, electric recharging stations may be good ideas for the specific age range and demographic of New Yorkers who are her voters, but may not offer much in the way of realistic improvements in the life of many people in other demographics. What, is the government going to roll out electric charging stations across the expanse of the nation even in low population density areas too?

 Not everyone can afford to upgrade their car to an electric vehicle either. There's an elitist view that says people are too dumb to know their own interests so if you force them to buy an electric car then they'll be better off with savings on fuel, however I've read research that puts doubt on this idea. People are actually fairly good at weighing up the alternatives themselves. The only way to get rid of gasoline cars ASAP will be to price poor people out of the car market one way or another, and force them to take public transport. The remaining cars will be electric, but they'll be effectively rationed based on wealth.

[scriver]

"You're guaranteed a job" is literally how neo-liberals, not socialists, phrase "you're not allowed to turn down a job". It's what neo-liberals want, to be able to force people to work under unworkable conditions and remove the most basic of leverage that the ability to quit and walk away means from the very least leverage-holding people in society.

Just look at Sweden. It's exactly the kind of bullshit neo-liberal anti-socialism masquerading as left-wing that is popular here.

[Maximum Spin]

Oh so you can even isolate a room so well you'd die of runaway heat

Oh well no. We don't have the technology to do that, to insulate a building that well, especially not a building that has already been constructed. It's a theoretical point, not a practical one.

I'm starting to believe there is a deeper issue, like there mustn't be a single passive home in the USA for this to be controversial...

There are a bunch of passive homes in the USA, actually, having been built during various fads. They never caught on because they honestly don't work that well.

[MaxTheFox]

How old do y'all think I am?

[Egan_BW]

ehh, 16

[KittyTac]

Didn't you mention going to college? 20-ish.

[Eschar]

Interesting question. How old do y'all think I am?

[scriver]

How old do y'all think I am?

I'd say around 20. 17-22.

Interesting question. How old do y'all think I am?

Jesus, you've only been here three years? I feel like I've seen your name around for at least five or seven.

Anyway I'm guessing around 20. 18-23

[bloop_bleep]

Eschar gets 15-18 from me. Since I think you mentioned high school or something of the sort.

[Enemy post]

How old do y'all think I am?

I think I’d have to guess 19.

[King Zultan]

How old do y'all think I am?

20?