• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is AOC's REAL Green New Deal

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
@Mindmaster I'm pretty sure future generations will revile people with your mindset.

The time for reasonableness is long past. The house really IS on fire.

Says the person that replies with a typical ad hominem attack. :D

Nah, the house isn't on fire it's just some people lack the intellectual capacity to differentiate a crisis from worthless idealism. And, I beg to differ on being reasonable -- there is always a time for patience, understanding, and most of all compassion -- especially in the context of radical shifts whether they be societal, technological, or economic. Of course, the ultimate response to your assertion is simple: If there was a better idea why wouldn't someone be using it? It's not as simple as "oil monopolies" or other corporate interests -- remember how much infrastructure was invested so that you could travel by horse before the train. Trains out-modded horses for long distance travel because they were better. But, at the time, everything to do with horses and the people that supported their operation had a "monopoly". The same thing happened with automobiles and planes came along -- trains moved into niches rather than being the exclusive long distance travel mechanism, BUT trains had the monopoly on that travel before. Nothing stops progress when the solution is more efficient. Nothing. That efficiency is the fuel to the fire of innovation, and that's why fossil fuel tech is 100's of generations ahead of something like solar (which is really only in it's 2nd or 3rd generation). Simply re-iterating that we should get behind some unproven idea or concept because it's "the right thing to do" is not enough. If the concept doesn't have sufficient reward it puts itself on the shelf. Throwing resources at it will not "remove it" from the "somewhat useful" category -- it has to compete successfully and win the arms race of ideas. Solar, for example, currently has a hard time powering a small sailboat -- how can you scale that up to something larger and not create an energy crisis when you pull the plug on some "dirty old furnace" reactor? No one behind these ideas can justify them mathematically because they're physically IMPOSSIBLE. We could cover our towns in solar and it still wouldn't be enough. Want to live on solar? O.K., hope you don't like your furnace, fridge, dryer, washing machine, and TV -- or at least hope you like using it part-time or one-at-a-time. :D

As far as the future argument, this is the same silly argument that all the nutters use to convince other people to do things through fear. Yeah, I'm not biting. You can take that dingy old suit and put it back in the box. :D
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
@Mindmaster I'm pretty sure future generations will revile people with your mindset.

The time for reasonableness is long past. The house really IS on fire.

No, it's not. Breathe...just breathe.

The most amazing thing to me about AOC (and her ilk) is that she is able to keep from foaming at the mouth when she spews out these idiocies. But be that as it may, the first common sense question is how many solar panels will it take to give something the size of 747 enough power to get off the ground?
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
@Mindmaster @BSM1

I think the mindsets you're both demonstrating are extremely dangerous. It's also clear to me that neither of you can be shifted from your positions. I hope you're right about climate change and I'm wrong, but sadly, the data is on my side.

You've both used fallacy arguments in this thread, and life is too short for me to show them to you. ciao
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
No, it's not. Breathe...just breathe.

The most amazing thing to me about AOC (and her ilk) is that she is able to keep from foaming at the mouth when she spews out these idiocies. But be that as it may, the first common sense question is how many solar panels will it take to give something the size of 747 enough power to get off the ground?

The solar panels would be larger than the plane. :D
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
@Mindmaster @BSM1

I think the mindsets you're both demonstrating are extremely dangerous. It's also clear to me that neither of you can be shifted from your positions. I hope you're right about climate change and I'm wrong, but sadly, the data is on my side.

You've both used fallacy arguments in this thread, and life is too short for me to show them to you. ciao

We are...sleep peacefully tonight.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
@Mindmaster @BSM1

I think the mindsets you're both demonstrating are extremely dangerous. It's also clear to me that neither of you can be shifted from your positions. I hope you're right about climate change and I'm wrong, but sadly, the data is on my side.

You've both used fallacy arguments in this thread, and life is too short for me to show them to you. ciao

I'll shift the minute someone presents to me a concise argument that makes sense in favor of such radical diversions from our present course. In fact, I'll promise that will occur INSTANTLY if such information reaches my awareness. The "popular" data is on your side, mostly from leftist mouthpieces -- the detail information completely refutes climate change other than what has normally occurred before. The Earth's climate is always changing -- it's been warmer and colder than it is now. So yeah, I don't buy it -- because there's nothing to buy. The Sun has far more affect on this scenario than _anything_ we're doing here on earth.

However, I know a lot about the eco-power stuff just because it's one of my interests. I love sailboats, the idea of possibly supplementing a home with solar, and so on. I can't justify it on any scale outside of the "boat" application, and that's only because the power demands in that case are so low. A solar farm large enough to power the 1500kw/h a day my home would need is larger than the land I have the house on. If it doesn't work at that scale, it doesn't work at _any_ scale except for the low-power application unless you literally want to double the urban sprawl. :D Large cities just wouldn't have the space, it'd be impossible.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Just gave me a great idea. The airlines could sell advertising space on the bottom of the panels.

Well, you'd also need to make the plane much larger to carry all those batteries. It'd make the C-5 Galaxy aircraft the military use look like a baby. Oh yeah, and extend the runways by like double and mow down those houses. :D People just don't know what they're asking for sometimes.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well, you'd also need to make the plane much larger to carry all those batteries. It'd make the C-5 Galaxy aircraft the military use look like a baby. Oh yeah, and extend the runways by like double and mow down those houses. :D People just don't know what they're asking for sometimes.
It is dubious if commercial planes could ever be electric. The power density in batteries is too low and there is not very much even theoretical room for improvement. Cars are doable since for most people a two hundred mile per day limit is not a problem.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It is dubious if commercial planes could ever be electric. The power density in batteries is too low and there is not very much even theoretical room for improvement. Cars are doable since for most people a two hundred mile per day limit is not a problem.
Not everything need be a massive government program fueled by higher taxes.
There are simple cheap things which can be done to boost energy independence
& greenishness. They which could be done right now to great effect.
Unleash the greedy running dogs of capitalism....
- Eliminate zoning prohibitions for solar & wind systems.
- Eliminate property tax increases for green & conservation systems.
- Cut burdensome permit fees for such upgrades.
- Allow immediate expensing of such systems, rather than lengthy depreciation periods.
- Modify building codes for more energy efficient construction.
- Modify zoning laws to allow higher housing density.
- Modify housing codes to allow higher building occupancy.

Other measures.....
- Ultimately, higher population density makes public transportation, walking & bikng more efficient.
- Don't increase payroll, income or sales taxes....increase fuel taxes to encourage conservation.
- Cut wars & foreign police actions, which are costly & energy wasteful.
 
Last edited:

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Well, you'd also need to make the plane much larger to carry all those batteries. It'd make the C-5 Galaxy aircraft the military use look like a baby. Oh yeah, and extend the runways by like double and mow down those houses. :D People just don't know what they're asking for sometimes.

As a side note, when the C-5's were first put into service they had an annoying problem of some of their wheels falling off when coming into for a landing.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
This is not a proposal for a law but a statement of philosophy and a frame-of-reference through which laws and administration actions would be focused. So any claim that passing this resolution would necessarily result in this or that action is at best a misunderstanding and at worst a deliberate lie.

Text - H.Res.109 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal. is the actual text of the document introduced. Here's the meat of the resolution. I've highlighted some key elements of the resolution including some that are identical to what Trump claims he wants.

And to repeat what to me is the central point, what this really calls for is this: a Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses;

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—

(1) it is the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal—

(A) to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers;

(B) to create millions of good, high-wage jobs and ensure prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States;

(C) to invest in the infrastructure and industry of the United States to sustainably meet the challenges of the 21st century;

(D) to secure for all people of the United States for generations to come—

(i) clean air and water;

(ii) climate and community resiliency;

(iii) healthy food;

(iv) access to nature; and

(v) a sustainable environment; and

(E) to promote justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this resolution as “frontline and vulnerable communities”);

(2) the goals described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph (1) (referred to in this resolution as the “Green New Deal goals”) should be accomplished through a 10-year national mobilization (referred to in this resolution as the “Green New Deal mobilization”) that will require the following goals and projects—

(A) building resiliency against climate change-related disasters, such as extreme weather, including by leveraging funding and providing investments for community-defined projects and strategies;

(B) repairing and upgrading the infrastructure in the United States, including—

(i) by eliminating pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as much as technologically feasible;

(ii) by guaranteeing universal access to clean water;

(iii) by reducing the risks posed by climate impacts; and

(iv) by ensuring that any infrastructure bill considered by Congress addresses climate change;

(C) meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources, including—

(i) by dramatically expanding and upgrading renewable power sources; and

(ii) by deploying new capacity;

(D) building or upgrading to energy-efficient, distributed, and “smart” power grids, and ensuring affordable access to electricity;

(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification;

(F) spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry;

(G) working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible, including—

(i) by supporting family farming;

(ii) by investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health; and

(iii) by building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food;

(H) overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in—

(i) zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing;

(ii) clean, affordable, and accessible public transit; and

(iii) high-speed rail;

(I) mitigating and managing the long-term adverse health, economic, and other effects of pollution and climate change, including by providing funding for community-defined projects and strategies;

(J) removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and reducing pollution by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage, such as land preservation and afforestation;

(K) restoring and protecting threatened, endangered, and fragile ecosystems through locally appropriate and science-based projects that enhance biodiversity and support climate resiliency;

(L) cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites, ensuring economic development and sustainability on those sites;

(M) identifying other emission and pollution sources and creating solutions to remove them; and

(N) promoting the international exchange of technology, expertise, products, funding, and services, with the aim of making the United States the international leader on climate action, and to help other countries achieve a Green New Deal;

(3) a Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses; and

(4) to achieve the Green New Deal goals and mobilization, a Green New Deal will require the following goals and projects—

(A) providing and leveraging, in a way that ensures that the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment, adequate capital (including through community grants, public banks, and other public financing), technical expertise, supporting policies, and other forms of assistance to communities, organizations, Federal, State, and local government agencies, and businesses working on the Green New Deal mobilization;

(B) ensuring that the Federal Government takes into account the complete environmental and social costs and impacts of emissions through—

(i) existing laws;

(ii) new policies and programs; and

(iii) ensuring that frontline and vulnerable communities shall not be adversely affected;

(C) providing resources, training, and high-quality education, including higher education, to all people of the United States, with a focus on frontline and vulnerable communities, so that all people of the United States may be full and equal participants in the Green New Deal mobilization;

(D) making public investments in the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies and industries;

(E) directing investments to spur economic development, deepen and diversify industry and business in local and regional economies, and build wealth and community ownership, while prioritizing high-quality job creation and economic, social, and environmental benefits in frontline and vulnerable communities, and deindustrialized communities, that may otherwise struggle with the transition away from greenhouse gas intensive industries;

(F) ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers to plan, implement, and administer the Green New Deal mobilization at the local level;

(G) ensuring that the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages, hires local workers, offers training and advancement opportunities, and guarantees wage and benefit parity for workers affected by the transition;

(H) 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;

(I) strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment;

(J) strengthening and enforcing labor, workplace health and safety, antidiscrimination, and wage and hour standards across all employers, industries, and sectors;

(K) enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments with strong labor and environmental protections—

(i) to stop the transfer of jobs and pollution overseas; and

(ii) to grow domestic manufacturing in the United States;

(L) ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused;

(M) obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous peoples for all decisions that affect indigenous peoples and their traditional territories, honoring all treaties and agreements with indigenous peoples, and protecting and enforcing the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous peoples;

(N) ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies; and

(O) providing all people of the United States with—

(i) high-quality health care;

(ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing;

(iii) economic security; and

(iv) clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.
51066364_10157467087579305_5187566293015855104_n.jpg
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Yeah, I'm not into some idealistic world that doesn't exist. People depend on the "non-green" jobs for their livelihood. It's not about economics solely, it's about people who are doing perfectly fine right now getting the shaft.

It's not short term thinking, it's the only thinking in regard to #2. What alternative tech exists that will bridge the gap between _now_ and some idealistic future where we don't need our fossil fuel/nuclear infrastructure? That question has to be sensibly answered or the notion she presents is just incoherent rambling. Should we keep looking for those options? Hell yes, but if they're not here we shouldn't cut off our noses to spite our faces. It's not my job to prove anything, but hers, she's making the claim that we should do X... All I am asking is why, how, and when and critiquing what is absolutely absurd.
He's right! We must ban motor cars to protect the buggy whip industry!
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
As a side note, when the C-5's were first put into service they had an annoying problem of some of their wheels falling off when coming into for a landing.

Oh, the wheels fell off this "Green Deal" the minute it was published. :D

It'd just be imitating reality at this point.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Not everything need be a massive government program fueled by higher taxes.
There are simple cheap things which can be done to boost energy independence
& greenishness. They which could be done right now to great effect.
Unleash the greedy running dogs of capitalism....
- Eliminate zoning prohibitions for solar & wind systems.
- Eliminate property tax increases for green & conservation systems.
- Cut burdensome permit fees for such upgrades.
- Allow immediate expensing of such systems, rather than lengthy depreciation periods.
- Modify building codes for more energy efficient construction.
- Modify zoning laws to allow higher housing density.
- Modify housing codes to allow higher building occupancy.

Other measures.....
- Ultimately, higher population density makes public transportation, walking & bikng more efficient.
- Don't increase payroll, income or sales taxes....increase fuel taxes to encourage conservation.
- Cut wars & foreign police actions, which are costly & energy wasteful.

I'm down with most of this, tbh, but I'd also add there is nothing stopping indiviudals from taking control of it. You can solar up your home, or wind turbine it. You can choose cleaner or electric vehicles, etc. This doesn't need to be enforced, if you ask me. Gotta move rural? Do it, but stop blaming everyone else, lol.
 
Last edited:

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
AOC proposes the start of a plan and the complaints are "why has she not finished with a formal, detailed plan yet" from the right. But of course Trump is the master of doing that and it's perfectly OK when he does it.

living in such a Spartan manner

Good, well paying jobs is spartan? Because that's one of her points. Bringing back manufacturing jobs is spartan? Because that's one of her points. Why not read what she proposed before you attack it.

Renewable power does not meet the needs

That is right on the edge of being solved. Let me highlight something you ignored or did not read in the proposal that is there more than once as much as technologically feasible

All these ideas and not a single well thought out , realistic, and practical plan.

I decide to remodel my home for example. I have some ideas about what should happen. At this point you complain that there's not a single well thought out etc plan. I tell you that is one of the stupidest things I've heard in quite a while since I've just started developing a plan and have laid out a philosophy and road map to develop "well thought out, realistic and practical plan".

Let me quote what is in the resolution: a Green New Deal must be developed
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Well the Satanist's position appears to be pro pollution, anti environment, why does that not surprise me??????
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well the Satanist's position appears to be pro pollution, anti environment, why does that not surprise me??????

Anti-Green-Nonsense doesn't have anything to do with any of those subjects, but if you must. It surprises me that you can breathe with your mouth closed, but I'm sure it's possible. But, I'm not expecting much, because nothing you said here was correct, except that I'm a Satanist, lol, as if that's relevant to the conversation. It sort of strikes me as, "I got nothing, let's go for the his religion." It's pretty desperate, nonetheless.

You are obviously incapable of reading any of my other posts in this thread which pretty clearly outline my position on the subject, which is founded in the realities of the conversation not some idealistic liberal religion talking points. I'm not into your cult, and won't be because that's how I see it. None of the points made along those lines are made with evidence, economic realities, or any consideration of anything that actually exists on this planet. It's obvious I'm very into "clean" power and subjects along those lines, but that would require you read anything I posted in the last 5 or so posts. Do that, fire up the furnace on that ole grey matter, and get back to me.

Of course, then you go for "burn the witch". That's fine, but I've seen your kind before and I'm beyond it. You try to frame people as despicable while manifesting the traits of the lowest of the low, it's just hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
Top