The Green New Deal

Feb 2019
1,307
586
nunya
I recently heard a Republican ranting about the Green New Deal and how it would "destroy this country". While this seemed a little far fetched to me, I like to be informed. So I went to congress.gov, read the deal, then did more research on CNN and Fox News to balance my information.

I am honestly shocked at the level of mistruths Republicans have gone to about this deal. First off, it's not a deal. It's a draft to create a deal. Here's what one of the points in the deal says, (16 pg 10)


(3) a Green New Deal must be developed
through transparent and inclusive consultation, col- laboration, and partnership with frontline and vul- nerable communities, labor unions, worker coopera- tives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses;


Notice how it says "developed". The deal isn't made. The "deal" is more of a "draft" meant to talk about the points it was making and then develop a deal based on that information. Which is pretty frightening, according to the research talked about in the "draft", we could see over a trillion dollars in damage to our infrastructure with a 2 degrees celsius jump in global temperature.

A lot of people also think this deal is just about climate change. It's not. If you read it, it talks a lot about working wages stagnating, income inequality, medicare-for-all, racial wealth divides, and gender pay gaps as well as other socioeconomic issues.

Frantic republicans who continuously rant about how terrible this would be for us and how high in the sky AOC is. But this is actually doable. We are already paying 450 billion dollars a year for global warming related floods/wildfires as well as paying much more for our healthcare than other countries. This deal can be possible, despite the lunatic rants of republicans trying to save their jobs as fossil fuel poster boys in congress. I hope that we don't go too far down the path of climate change and fossil fuels before we realize what we have done and the irreversible damage that will give our grandchildren a hellish world of debt and fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Dec 2015
17,907
17,001
Arizona
This is a great topic, which demonstrates ONE MORE TIME, how regressive the GOP is. The Party of NO has fought environmental issues for decades. When Obama brought back more protections, Trump rolled them back. And the cult applauded him.
Think back to all the proposals. Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Biomass........not once in the last 5 decades has the GOP even considered an alternative to coal, oil, gas. Why? Because of those who stand to gain the most from fossil fuels--those companies that use and sell energy generated from fossil fuels. Large private and corporate sponsors like the Koch brothers and Mercers have set up and funded private think tanks over the last thirty years, and support the withdrawal from the Paris Accord. These same people have lobbied and lied about our environmental protections and that includes Climate Change proposals.
The GOP turned it's back on environmental protection a long time ago. Apparently, they are too stupid to realize the harm they are doing to their OWN families and future families.
Fortunately, our Millens, Gen Zs and Gen Xs refuse to buy it. It's time to VOTE OUT anyone who can't look forward. Trump and the Gang can laugh at AOC all they want, but it's the AOCs of this world who will change it....for the better.
 
Nov 2012
11,032
9,244
nirvana
I recently heard a Republican ranting about the Green New Deal and how it would "destroy this country". While this seemed a little far fetched to me, I like to be informed. So I went to congress.gov, read the deal, then did more research on CNN and Fox News to balance my information.

I am honestly shocked at the level of mistruths Republicans have gone to about this deal. First off, it's not a deal. It's a draft to create a deal. Here's what one of the points in the deal says, (16 pg 10)

(3) a Green New Deal must be developed
through transparent and inclusive consultation, col- laboration, and partnership with frontline and vul- nerable communities, labor unions, worker coopera- tives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses;


Notice how it says "developed". The deal isn't made. The "deal" is more of a "draft" meant to talk about the points it was making and then develop a deal based on that information. Which is pretty frightening, according to the research talked about in the "draft", we could see over a trillion dollars in damage to our infrastructure with a 2 degrees celsius jump in global temperature.

A lot of people also think this deal is just about climate change. It's not. If you read it, it talks a lot about working wages stagnating, income inequality, medicare-for-all, racial wealth divides, and gender pay gaps as well as other socioeconomic issues.

Frantic republicans who continuously rant about how terrible this would be for us and how high in the sky AOC is. But this is actually doable. We are already paying 450 billion dollars a year for global warming related floods/wildfires as well as paying much more for our healthcare than other countries. This deal can be possible, despite the lunatic rants of republicans trying to save their jobs as fossil fuel poster boys in congress. I hope that we don't go too far down the path of climate change and fossil fuels before we realize what we have done and the irreversible damage that will give our grandchildren a hellish world of debt and fire.
You mean organized labor, and competition for the fossil fuel monopoly, cutting in to their subsidy money?
 
Feb 2019
1,307
586
nunya
You mean organized labor, and competition for the fossil fuel monopoly, cutting in to their subsidy money?
Yes, organized labor, I'm not sure what you mean by fossil fuel subsidy money, but my original sentence on fossil fuels was referring to big oil and coal corporations bribing politicians (mainly republican) to support causes that hurt us in the long term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danu
Dec 2018
2,798
2,009
Wisconsin
To be fair, this is the problem with AOC. She had a MASSIVE/AMBITIOUS initiative that wasn't even a bill itself. But she let the document out along with a poorly thought out talking points memo and the right seized on it. Are they painting the document accurately? Fuck no. But that's what you do in politics these days. You take a small nugget paint an entire party in broad brush statements. So when you have a young and inexperienced politicians trying to shoot for the moon, they make these unforced errors.
 
Sep 2014
1,420
173
On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
Nothing in Nature Is Where It Belongs Unless Man Put It There

To superstitious Socialite Socialists sitting pretty, Nature is a pretty sight that must not be interfered with. To the kind of Americans who created the wealth these spoiled brats inherited, the uninhibited development of nature is the source of high-paying jobs and inexpensive products.
 
Feb 2019
1,307
586
nunya
Nothing in Nature Is Where It Belongs Unless Man Put It There

To superstitious Socialite Socialists sitting pretty, Nature is a pretty sight that must not be interfered with. To the kind of Americans who created the wealth these spoiled brats inherited, the uninhibited development of nature is the source of high-paying jobs and inexpensive products.
This is more than just "nature". A walk in the park in the morning isn't what's at stake here. We could lose 1 trillion dollars repairing damaged infrastructure along with the 450 billion we are already shelling out paying for floods and wildfires who's cause is attributed to climate change, something that would definitely hurt the "high paying jobs and inexpensive products" you discuss, which if we still have after the Trump presidency.
 
Jun 2019
264
104
NC
You mean organized labor, and competition for the fossil fuel monopoly, cutting in to their subsidy money?
Which do you prefer, organized labor where people are getting paid to work, or welfare, people just being paid, both are born is socialism, but one is a quid pro quo scenario, the other is a simple hand out. My vote is for productivity.