What do you think of AOC's New Green Deal?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
19 Answers
I think it’s crazy and that she’s crazy. Socialism doesn’t work.
The liberals on Facebook don’t even mention her. They’ll curse and fight about how terrible Trump is but they’re mum on Cortez. She’s nuttier than B Sanders.
Looking forward to hearing opinions on her ! Fluther is basically Democrats so I hope they’ll answer your question.
Well, so far no other answers which is what I thought would happen. So I’ll explain what her Green Deal entails:
Removing combustible engines from the roads or expanding high-speed rail to largely eliminate air travel would require nothing short of revolutionizing transportation.(all trucks and cars would be removed from the roads; all airplanes would be eliminated) . I don’t know about emergency helicopters at hospitals.
Some of the more progressive economic policies — universal health care and a job guarantee, for example — while popular among some Democrats, would also be very difficult to implement and transition into.
Likely 2020 Democratic Candidates Want To Guarantee A Job To Every American
Likely 2020 Democratic Candidates Want To Guarantee A Job To Every American
On top of all that, implementing all of these policies could cost trillions upon trillions of dollars.
Then there is something about gas emissions from cattle being eliminated.
@Aster I, too, am curious to see what responses I get. I have my own opinions. And AOC’s website rollout didn’t help her case at all. It stated that the government would guarantee a living wage even if someone was unable or unwilling to work. They got such a blast that website came down almost immediately. But to me, the fact that it was put up like that says that is what is on their minds.
@Aster “Socialism doesn’t work.”
AOC is a Democratic Socialist which is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THING. Democratic Socialism is more effective than our system in many countries (see Scandinavia), and has worked well in the USA too in our past. Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment insurance, public education, libraries, fire departments, are all “Socialist.” During the height of economic growth in the US while Eisenhower (a Republican by the way) was President, the top marginal tax rate was 91%. We live in a mixed economy already, which is what Democratic Socialism is.
Science has spoken and we’ve got 12 years until we start seeing some pretty horrible outcomes. We’re already witnessing the effects of Global Climate Change, and it’s not good. If we treated Climate Change as the existential threat that it is, we would be willing to make the changes that this country needs.
We’ve spent something around $6,000,000,000,000 fucking around in the Middle East since September 11. If we had used that money to fund US manufacturing of clean power, and electric vehicles, we not only would be leading the world in a highly desirable future technology, but we’d be able to stay the hell out of the affairs of the Middle East.
The Green New Deal is the best way forward to prevent catastrophe and to boost the economy and the middle class.
@seawulf575 yes; I forgot that the deal says people simply unwilling to work would get a monthly check. Hilarious; will never happen.
Maybe, just maybe, the political pendulum is starting to move to the left. I give AOC a lot of credit, as young (she is not yet eligible to run for president) freshman member of Congress to create such a resolution. The problem with Trump is that he is ignoring real issues like climate change and income inequality, and is pursuing phony issues like the need for the Wall. I am not familiar with all the specifics of the Green New Deal, but hopefully it will initiate a conversation on vital issues.
@gorillapaws I think there are a few things you need to revisit in your examples. Social Security is facing a funding issue. It isn’t dying yet, but at current rates could be broke by 2034 unless action is taken. That action requires our federal government to work out the details. How is that working for us these days? Our elected leaders are dysfunctional at best. I’m not sure I would count that as a win for socialism. Unemployment Insurance isn’t socialistic. It is paid for by employers. They are required to pay it for each of their employees. That is where the funding comes from. Capitalistic, not socialistic. Yes, they had to be forced into it, but it isn’t coming out of the tax dollars.
@seawulf575 “at current rates could be broke by 2034 ”
That’s a bunch of nonsense. Hell, we could all be speaking Chinese by 2030. Trying to forecast that far out is as absurd as trying to predict the winner of the World Series 2 decades out.
Unemployment is compelled by the government. It’s effectively a tax. It’s a form of Socialism.
And if you’re really afraid of social security’s long-term viability, you should support funding it.
@seawulf575 , Social Security, unemployment benefits, Medicare and public education are all socialistic. It is not a question of whether or not we will become socialistic. It is a matter of degree.
@gorillapaws Social Security is required to be reviewed and adjusted at least every 75 years. Yes, it is silly since trying to project out 75 years is impossible. But that is how it was set up. And yes, barring any changes, it will be broke by the mid 2030’s. Unfortunately, we are depending on the village idiots to drop partisan politics and make adult decisions.
The “green new deal” is just legislative porn, it will never happen in that context. She is either a complete f’ing idiot or a publicity genius. I’m all for an energy moonshot but her proposal is more of a comedic shot in the foot.
Also, a good part of our fucking around in the middle east was likely a stealthy resource grab from places like Afghanistan where the few known reserves of rare-earth minerals that we must have to make efficient batteries and solar panels comes from…. something to ponder.
@ARE_you_kidding_me ”...her proposal is more of a comedic shot in the foot.”
Out of curiosity, why is it comedic when massive investments in working-class domestic initiatives are proposed (that could help mitigate catastrophe), but it’s very serious when we gift billions of dollars to the 1% & Fortune 500 companies, and when we spend as much-or-more bombing people on the other side of the planet for oil—costing trillions of dollars and thousands of lives?
What do you think will happen in 12 years if we ignore the warning of the scientific community? I’m not laughing.
It’s comedic because it’s so naive and offers nothing even remotely viable. In 12 years things will be more or less the same for the record. Actual climate problems are 75–100 years out on our current trajectory. Not that it’s not a serious issue but her proposal is akin to waving a magic wand. You simply cannot legislate this problem away, it has to be something people want and it needs to be deliverable. I don’t believe you’ll find many willing to give up their SUV, air conditioning or other energy consuming creature comforts when the rubber meets the road. I also don’t think we can supply what it will take to eliminate dirty power without turning to nuclear yet either. I’m pretty passionate about getting our power supply on the right track but this is not it.
@ARE_you_kidding_me She wants to do away with nuclear too. She wants 100% wind and solar. In reality, we would need a solar panel farm about the size of California to come close to powering the nation as it is. And she wants to turn everything electric including her new high powered rail system. That means the solar farm would need to be about twice that size.
I agree with some parts of the Green New Deal and I disagree with others.
@Caravanfan Yes, there are some things I agree with as well.
Answer this question 
