world

U.S. Democrats float 'Green New Deal' to end fossil fuel era

151 Comments
By Valerie Volcovici

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2019.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

151 Comments
Login to comment

@ coal, gas and oil tax cuts and subsisides are socialists.

As is spending TRILLIONS of US taxpayers' money to finance wars (Iraq, Libya, etc.) in support of the .01% controlling oil and gas - and those that finance them. Or would that be fascist?

13 ( +15 / -2 )

cla68@ coal, gas and oil tax cuts and subsisides are socialists. Keep alive those industries so others cannot rise.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

"It’s a socialist manifesto that lays out a laundry list of government giveaways, including guaranteed food, housing, college, & economic security even for those who refuse to work," Republican Senator John Barrasso, chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, said on Twitter.

How would you describe trillions in tax cuts to corporation to do stock buybacks that instantly enrich those at the top?

Working hard for your money?

9 ( +13 / -4 )

@cla68 The Green Deal appears to be a socialist initiative.

In the bifurcated world of those claiming any initiative not pushed by Putintrump is 'socialist' that would mean anyone who follows Putintrump would be fascist. Simples.

8 ( +13 / -5 )

Interested in Barrosso’s funding?

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary/john-barrasso?cid=N00006236

520k from gas and oil.

Representatives do represent people or companies?

7 ( +10 / -3 )

an effort to make climate change a central issue in the 2020 presidential race.

Which it must be. Expect the hydrocarbons industries in the US, Canada, MENA, Russia, etc. along with their financial backers to join forces with ranchers and tobacco industry PACs to make this the most expensive political campaign in history. Go Green!

rising political star Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 

Go AOC! The mere mention of the woman's name makes millions of America men (especially those most easily frightened, and especially those most easily frightened by strong, intelligent women) respond like the horses in 'Young Frankenstein'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAYVIY1izho

7 ( +12 / -5 )

The democrats 'Green New Deal' includes -- but not limited to -- the following: eliminate all fossil-fuel forms of transportation, including air travel, within 10 years: Tear down every single building in the U.S. -- commercial and residence -- and replace them with eco-friendly structures.

No it doesn't, and thank you for playing "Spread That Hyperbolic Talking Point!"

7 ( +12 / -5 )

Yes, and let's put the weight of the government behind it. Let's stop wasting the precious natural resources we have (such as the oil reserve and coal deposits) and use our prosperous economy to invest in new technology . Let us return to CAFE standards for vehicles, let us continue to work on using more solar and wind energy and fewer fossil fuels.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

This is the kind of action needed in every countries.

This is not a question of what we can or should do anymore. It's about what we must do to survive.

The old guys and gals denying climate change will not be around to see it. It's for the younger generations that we must do it.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

More wasted time and money, never will be implemented.

The American elitists may favor environmental catastrophes for us lesser mortals but we're not going to take it lying down, in the mud.

Solar power, geothermal power, wind farms, hydro power it's all within our reach. Saving our children's futures is not a waste of time and money.

And you'll find that people will fight for their sons and daughters futures, the right not to die/starve/be driven from their lands because of greedy, corporate devils who think only of short-term and profit.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

The Green Deal appears to be a socialist initiative.

Bloody socialists, wanting to save the planet for our descendants. How very selfish of them.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

The concept of Green as a symbol is fine.

The point is... green also means NOT cutting down "green" plants that use CO2, not just controlling CO2 emissions.

It also means "reducing" cattle that provide milk, meats etc. that "eat" grass what forces "deforestation" and opening up vast acres for grazing. All of which reduces "green" plants that use CO2.

So.., man made effect is not just industrial in the sense of "fossil fuels".

Then there are the "oceans" which and major rivers and lakes that are polluted to a point where even if the air may be somewhat "cleaned", the lack of water is a much more critical issue.

There has to be a less "political" and much more comprehensive approach to all these rhetoric and grandstanding by scientists and politicians alike. The "blame" game may get attention and funding to "profit" those who get the business, but not necessarily resolve the fundamental problem of man's negative impact on our mother Earth.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

"Today is the day that we choose to assert ourselves as a global leader in transitioning to 100 percent renewable energy and charting that path,” Ocasio-Cortez told reporters.

And today could be the day that the rest of the world starts to respect the US again. Good on AOC, a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stale arena.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

The democrats 'Green New Deal' includes -- but not limited to -- the following: eliminate all fossil-fuel forms of transportation, including air travel, within 10 years: Tear down every single building in the U.S. -- commercial and residence -- and replace them with eco-friendly structures.

If only that were true. Think of the money and jobs it would generate.

Very telling that Trumpists would promote falsehoods, though. I mean, what could they possibly hope to achieve?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

You don’t have to take it lying down, but to implement such a radical and wasteful expenditure will never happen, at least on US soil, now in Europe, I wouldn’t know or care.

There's nothing wasteful about saving lives around the world. You may claim you don't care but the rest of the world is not America.

Yes, I agree and I think we should develop these new alternatives but to think that they will replace fossil fuel‘s within the next 10 years is smoking something, it will never, ever happen, now 25-30 maybe.

Ah, the old you must be on drugs retort. Perhaps you could elaborate on how it will never happen but also how it might happen? Or are you hedging your bets?

What?

I suggest you read it again. You've heard of cause and effect, yes? Climate change will lead to environmental catastrophes, mass migrations, resource wars and the raising of sea levels.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Yes, I agree and I think we should develop these new alternatives but to think that they will replace fossil fuel‘s within the next 10 years is smoking something, it will never, ever happen, now 25-30 maybe.

So getting off fossil fuel is a good thing generally but you think the goals are over optimistic.

That’s refreshing to hear when you listen to the appalling anti-science gibberish spouted by Trump, the US right and conspiracy theorists.

Glad you are not in that camp.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Just a clarification to my post. “Trump, the US right and conspiracy theorists” are not necessarily separable. Trump himself is in the conspiracy theory camp on the subject of climate change and other issues.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Really? Let’s start with Democrats and their disastrous policies that have decimated minority communities first, get that in order, acknowledge it and address it and then we can worry about this so called Climate change.

How about we stick on topic, instead, for a change? Speaking of which; climate.

The evidence is all around us. It's happening now. Why are you in denial?

https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/10-myths-about-climate-change

The list is endless and if anyone can believe that moonbat AOC 

I thought you were against the name-calling and petty jibes?

I worry about these clown so called scientists that are making millions of this junk

Making millions of what junk? Please can you speak English.

Is renowned naturalist Sir David Attenborough talking nonsense?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/03/david-attenborough-collapse-civilisation-on-horizon-un-climate-summit

4 ( +7 / -3 )

From the FAQ:

A “Green New Deal” FAQ page posted on Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional website says a “Green New Deal” Would guarantee “[e]conomic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work.” In other words, people who may not want to work.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

They may not be the ones doing the burning, Jimizo, but they're heating/powering their homes and cars and flying around on planes that AOC wants to get rid of because other people are doing the burning.

Yes. I use electricity genearated from fossil fuels as I don’t have a choice and don’t want to freeze to death or die of heatstroke, but I think we should be doing everything possible to move away from burning fossil fuels.

It’s not that difficult a concept.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

U.S. Democrats float 'Stand in line for Toilet Paper and Potatoes New Deal' to end free will era

FIXED

Fake news.

FIXED

3 ( +9 / -6 )

I have invested tons of money into renewables......

And what I hate about the the eco-warrior types is that they refuse to see reality!!!

Renewables are a part of the solution. But they are not THE solution. Not now.

And yet anyone that points out that fact is destroyed!!!

There is NO way for renewables to provide all of the needs of the world. Not right now. THAT is a fact.

And when renewables advocates rule out nuclear power, that makes it even harder!!!

So, what is the way forward??

One thing I know is this.... you have to be truthful about what is and is not possible!!

Too many eco warriors live in a fantasy world.... and that destroys their credibility!!!

3 ( +9 / -6 )

@zones2surf

Being a bit more precise with your statements is useful. I notice you added ‘not now’ to the idea of renewables being the answer when you omitted it earlier.

I agree the 10-year target is over optimistic but agreeing that getting off fossil fuel should be the goal is important.

You do believe that, right?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Is renowned naturalist Sir David Attenborough talking nonsense?

Who?

He’s a renowned broadcaster and scholar. Climate science isn’t his area of expertise but he’s a brilliant man who disagrees with many science geniuses on the US right that the planet is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs went extinct because they couldn’t fit on Noah’s ark. You wouldn’t like him.

Anyway, who are the clownish so-called scientists around the world perpetuating the climate change myth and what faults do you see with their approach? There are some people who swallow a right or left package whole and just regurgitate it without thought or independent study. That obviously isn’t your style and I look forward to you dismantling their arguments with precision and erudition. It goes without saying that you won’t slip into comments about liberals as this would be irrelevant.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

to think that they will replace fossil fuel‘s within the next 10 years is smoking something, it will never, ever happen, now 25-30 maybe.

You disappoint me, bass. I thought Americans had the confidence and audacity to do anything they put their mind to. Kennedy got a man on the moon in less than 7 years. You don't believe American ingenuity can clean its act up in 10 years?

the earth has been here for billions....billions of years it survived a lot of crap, this old girl can dish out a lot, it survived a few meteor crashes

Yes, the Earth has been here a long time. About four and a half billion years. It's gone through plenty of change in that time. It saw the beginnings of primitive life here probably a little less than 4,000 million years ago. The first primates split off from other mammals about 85 million years ago, and hominids (our first direct ancestors) appeared some 15 to 20 million years ago. Homo sapiens is the only surviving member of the hominids; all the others (homo habilis, homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis and all the others, many of whom we probably don't even know about) died out.

The Earth has survived a lot of crap, including a lot of hominids. Us hominids, on the other hand, are not so good at surviving. (Before you try to tell me 'But we're still here! There are billions of us!' remember the Earth was once populated by dinosaurs, for some 150 million years. And now they're all gone (apart from the birds). After being TopDog for some ten times longer than we have been here; and we're trashing the place).

Yes, the Earth will survive. The Earth can take all the crap that's chucked at it, and dish out a lot more. That isn't the problem. We are the ones that won't survive, unless we change.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Forget about how much this idea would cost. The real question is who is going to do the work? If you are going to take on an enterprise as ambitious as this, you need people to execute your vision. You will need a skilled workforce with a strong work ethic to get this job done.

Right now in the US there are literally millions of high paying trade positions going unfilled almost entirely because of a lack of interest. Among the demographic that would, necessarily, be a major constituent of this needed workforce, these types of careers are not widely seen as desirable. But if this going to work then somebody, or more like a lot of somebodies, is going to have to get their hands dirty and bust a sweat. It is not going to be enough to take to the streets demanding change, what's going to be needed is hard work.

There better be a very robust job training and skill development program in this plan or it will never have a chance.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

No no it says UNWILLING to work. Not UNABLE.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

FYI - Nancy Pelosi just excluded AOC from the new Climate Change Committee.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

How does that work in, say, January in the northern hemisphere?!?!

You do realize that wind has nothing to do with temperature, and unless there is snow on top of it, a solar panel can work as well?

In addition, the proposal also includes ideas like upgrading construction and insulation on buildings to lower energy usage.

So basically... the same way electric heaters run now, just needing a lot less energy to do so.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

I worry about these clown so called scientists that are making millions of this junk.

Which scientists are you talking about and what faults do you find in their work? Names would be useful.

Do you think they are all clowns? Is it a hoax created by the Chinese?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

No, I’m not a liberal. They’re experts on everything, above my pay grade.

I think the onus is on you to explain why you dismiss the findings of the vast majority of climate scientists.

You are too bright a man to be with the Chinese Hoax theory. That’s Alex Jones/Donald Trump level.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

No money for a wall but 7 trillion dollars for this nonsense?

2 ( +6 / -4 )

No money for a wall but 7 trillion dollars for this nonsense?

They could just say Mexico will pay for it.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Of course none of this will happen in a 10 year period.

Then don’t put forward a proposal clearly stating it will be done within 10 years. It makes the creators of the initiative look foolish. But aside from that, unfortunately it’s painfully obvious that Ocasio-Cortez actually does believe it is possible.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The democrats 'Green New Deal' includes -- but not limited to -- the following: eliminate all fossil-fuel forms of transportation, including air travel, within 10 years: Tear down every single building in the U.S. -- commercial and residence -- and replace them with eco-friendly structures.

@David Varnes

No it doesn't, and thank you for playing "Spread That Hyperbolic Talking Point!"

“Tear down every single building” overstates the intent of the plan. However, what the proposed legislation does say, using this single example, is this:

”(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through [sic] electrification.” (page 7, lines 18-22)

The above ISN’T a “Hyperbolic Talking Point”. It is what the New Green Deal proposes.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Green New Deal sounds like a very good idea to me.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

"We don't inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children." - Native American proverb

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I think we are on the right track with finding alternative fuel sources but cutting it out entirely is something we won't be able to do for the foreseeable future. 10 years is actually laughable, and I have to question if AOC just came up with that estimation on her own or if she actually consulted someone...I'm guessing it was the former. She makes a lot of other good points though.

Ignoring the climate changes and criticizing global warming as a Chinese myth is absolute rubbish though. Fossil fuel and oil corporations have a lot of funding to be siphoned if you believe the myths though...

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Ocasio Cortez Green New Deal Resolution......

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5731829-Ocasio-Cortez-Green-New-Deal-Resolution

All the best to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, I won't pretend to share Alexandria political affiliations. Our ages are just a year and twenty seven days apart. I do respect and admire our generation showing strong political ambitions, even though Nancy Pelosi is a tad dismissive.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

They want to ban air travel. How stupid. Do these democrats realize that the rest of the world will still be flying??

Not quite. They want "to expand high-speed rail so broadly that most air travel would be rendered obsolete." And as anyone who has to fly domestically in the US would tell you, it's less fun than your average root canal. Build a shinkansen network like the rest of the developed world has and the majority of folks would be thrilled to embrace that option. Of course, they're not going to ban transcontinental or international flights but feel free to keep up the scare tactics.

And the "look squirrel/socialist" game of the GOP is impressive. One thought it was just loons online (the Nazis were socialists!) but now it's fully mainstream--everyone taking their cues from the moron in chief.

Trump: "We'll have none of that socialism peeps. Say it with me now--oligarchy, oligarchy, the white working class for oligarchy. And millions of sheeple say baa."

Paul Krugman offers a great rebuttal to the now sadly routine and ignorant bleats about socialism:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opinion/trump-socialism-state-of-the-union.html

1 ( +7 / -6 )

I’m from California, ground zero of the liberal echo chamber, been hearing it all my adult life.

Maybe you should take Trump's advice, get out of states turned liberal (like NY) if you don't like it there.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

And so I did, love Texas. With the exception of Austin, it’s a great normal place, trying to get the rest of my family out of the once great State of California, they can keep their billionaires, homeless and sanctuary cities and law breakers. Good luck to them

You seem to judge people based on their political standing without even having conversations with them. I pray to god you never land in a position working with or for a liberal. You'll hate them before they open their mouth.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Why are people who dismiss the findings of the vast majority of climate scientists around the world so reluctant to get into any kind of detail?

A cynical person may think they don’t know their arses from their elbows on this topic and are just spouting the party line.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

AOC's Green New Deal calls for no more airplanes. "That would be pretty hard for Hawaii," Sen. Mazie Hirono, from the Aloha State, said Thursday.  Heck, last week the progressives complained the TSA wasn’t getting paid. Now they want to get rid of airplanes. Hahahahah

And farting cows, ( so much for the beef and dairy industries )

$4.6 TRILLION in infrastructure spending ( that comes from where? )

Income guarantees for people who are unable or, get this, 'unwilling to work.'

She is a bonafide lunatic. Congratulations, New York voters.

cleo: Yes, the Earth will survive. The Earth can take all the crap that's chucked at it, and dish out a lot more. That isn't the problem. We are the ones that won't survive, unless we change.

Cleo, I hate to break it to you but we could go back to the Stone Age and stop all burning of fossil fuels and if Mother Nature wants it the Earth is gonna heat up or cool down like it has before the first human figured out how to start a fire. Also when the sun's done, we're done.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

What are your points of contention with the vast majority of climate scientists and what are your credentials?

My credentials are common sense. As cleo herself admitted in her own way, the Earth is way more powerful than humans. If the "vast majority" of climate scientists are right, how come China and India are burning fossil fuels like no one's business? Don't they care?

No Tucker Carlson. Howz about Lisa Kennedy instead? Watch and learn. Or not, lol.

Kennedy slams Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘fantasy resolutions’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=le2v_MNse5g

1 ( +5 / -4 )

It's called natural progression.

No, it's called cause and effect. As in if several billion people burn all of a planets fossil fuels at an increasing rate within a geological blinking of an eye, it will have an effect on that planet.

Common sense, right?

If denying proven facts because they aren't politically convenient to you is common sense, then yes.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Don’t have to have our own plan. Just #resist the Democratic majority like they did to us the last 2 years with no plan for anything. The majority has to “rule”

Or do they have their own plan I'm not aware of?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Yep resistance is where it’s at. That’s all liberals have done since November 2016. Prevent anything at all from getting done.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

So how’s the wall coming? I heard there is a possible deal.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The House Dems should just pass the plan and read it later.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

What are your points of contention with the vast majority of climate scientists and what are your credentials?

My credentials are common sense. As cleo herself admitted in her own way, the Earth is way more powerful than humans. If the "vast majority" of climate scientists are right, how come China and India are burning fossil fuels like no one's business? Don't they care?

So you have no credentials. I have common sense but I don’t have the arrogance to shoot down a scientific consensus with little or no knowledge of the field. I have a background in science but I don’t think I have the knowledge to dispute the idea of a consensus even in my very limited field. Don’t take the lead from Trump who is too ignorant to know how ignorant he is.

The earth is more powerful than humans? I’m not sure what that means but I don’t see why it means that human behaviour doesn’t endanger humans on it.

I don’t want to state the obvious but it might be necessary to point out that climate scientists are not burning fossil fuels. You tend to find that most doctors are not smoking cigarettes nor recommending them as what their country should do,

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I don’t want to state the obvious but it might be necessary to point out that climate scientists are not burning fossil fuels. You tend to find that most doctors are not smoking cigarettes nor recommending them as what their country should do,

?? Issues of food on the table and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness are far more important to 99% of the people rather than this faux socialist, globalist distribution of wealth farce.

When Al Gore, the Democratic rich hypocrites and the global warming alarmist poohbahs discontinue use of private jets and electricity in their own homes, then we may be onto something.

Until them let's stick with President Trump's agenda of job creation, higher wages, border security and quality of life issues for all Americans, including Dems.

Get woke on real issues already!

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Issues of food on the table and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness are far more important to 99% of the people rather than this faux socialist, globalist distribution of wealth farce.

Another one who hasn’t any knowledge of the science and runs to rightist/conspiracy theory tropes.

Where did you get the 99% from?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Where did you get the 99% from?

Anyone who doesn't own a private jet and that most likely includes you too.

That retort is soul destroying. It is beyond idiocy, has no respect for facts and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

The belief that climate change is a worry not shared by 99% of the population and an issue limited to private jet owners is sickening in its stupidity.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The above ISN’T a “Hyperbolic Talking Point”. It is what the New Green Deal proposes.

And? Nothing in the entire 14 page document, which is easy to find online in PDF form, says anything about eliminating air travel (which has been suggested numerous times on this thread), nor about tearing down anything.

Statements such as that are, by definition, hyperbole. It's taking a idea and boiling it down to a fear laden, hyperbolic and hyper partisan talking point to feed out in pablum pill form to those who cannot even take the time to read a 14 page document.

Put that together with a good dose of "SOCIALISM! Hide yur kids, hide your wives, it's SOCIALISM!" and you have a nice opiate for the conservative masses.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The scary thing is nine of the Dems running for president have signed onto AOC's plan -

Spartacus Cory Booker

Kamala Harris

Kirsten Gillibrand

Mike Bloomberg

Beto O'Rourke

Eric Swalwell

Bernie Sanders

Julian Castro

and most disappointing, the most sensible one, Tulsi Gabbard

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The scary thing is nine of the Dems running for president have signed onto AOC's plan

This is why I wear a diaper, sit in a basement, cowering in fear that Social Democrats might save the planet or threaten the enormous wealth of the aristocracy. There are so many things to be afraid of, or at least Limbaugh and Hannity tell me so everyday.

Again, I'm so old I remember when Americans weren't such wussies. FDR's we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Thank god his audience wasn't made up of infantalized FOX viewers.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Oh and paint your rooftops white. Reduce internal temperatures by 30% or more and reduce air conditioning. You've already researched this USA, time to use it

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Really? People still denying global warming? And with absolutely no data to back themselves up, except for Trump and the fossil fuel/oil corporations said so.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

They want to ban air travel. How stupid. Do these democrats realize that the rest of the world will still be flying??

0 ( +7 / -7 )

I don't think you guys actually read the proposed bill...

It says nowhere in it that they plan to ditch airplanes and demolish all building in America.

Its more about upgrading standards, and, for those of you who live in Japan, also benefit from a similar bill which keeps cheap constructors from building crappy houses that would crumble during an earthquake. It's a similar concept aimed at improving energy efficiency in current buildings while making it a standard in new ones... They aren't proposing an annihilation of the US building infrastructure...

As for airplanes, it states "overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible".

Though I too think a lot of the deal is a bit outlandish, you guys are making some pretty wild claims. If you have read it, then you're just gaslighting.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

You are too bright a man to be with the Chinese Hoax theory. That’s Alex Jones/Donald Trump level.

I agree with this, you've clearly shown an ability to debate and defend a political stance, but this seems like just an act of solidarity with Trump.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

“They want "to expand high-speed rail so broadly that most air travel would be rendered obsolete." And as anyone who has to fly domestically in the US would tell you, “

Who is say high-speed rail won’t be as miserable as a domestic flight from say LA to Dallas. I’d rather put up with a 2-3 hr uncomfortable flight any day rather that 9-10 hrs by rail.

Besides, Americans won’t accept that. We love our cars too.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

People need to know - the car you're driving now, and the planes you're flying on - AOC wants all of that to go away.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

and if Mother Nature wants it the Earth is gonna heat up or cool down like it has before the first human figured out how to start a fire.

Even Mother Nature is now part of right wing conspiracies. Past warmings and coolings had actual causes, not simply a planet getting out of bed in the morning and deciding to throw some more coal into the sun.

My credentials are common sense.

It rarely appears so to most people here. More of a devotion to the prescribed right wing cause of embracing ignorance and ignoring proven facts.

how come China and India......

What about etc

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Even Mother Nature is now part of right wing conspiracies.

Only in your mind, Clippety.

 Past warmings and coolings had actual causes

It's called natural progression. Common sense, right?

Ocasio-Cortez is sharp...

Bwahahahahahahaha

... and already getting to work. Makes Trump look like even more like the dithering old idiot he is. The guy is sounding more and more incoherent as the days fly by.

That's what you call getting something 100% ass backwards, serendipitous.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

I heard Senator HulaHoop Hirono is upset since she won't accumulate frequent flyer miles if jet travel becomes a no-no under the Green New Deal...

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Is it fair to say that the GOP plan is to depend on oil indefinitely and bring back obsolete, polluting industries like coal?

Or do they have their own plan I'm not aware of?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The wall only needs 26 billion. The Green New Deal requires a large percentage of all of the money in the world.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Where did you get the 99% from?

Some people are best left ignored

The wall only needs 26 billion.

A mere 26 billion? Mexico needs to dig deep, I suggest they up their narcotic exports.

The Green New Deal requires a large percentage of all of the money in the world.

People are willing to pay for continued existence.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Well, this just in - the New Green Deal has earned the seal of approval from Bill Clinton's VP Al Gore, who failed to stop Bush 2 in 2000. He said it's ambitious and comprehensive!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

15,897 votes. That’s all it took the bartender to get elected to Congress. That’s not a mandate for anything.

Hmm... the right complaining about a low number of votes not being a mandate.

Hmm...

Carry on.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Ok get this. Here in Seattle, we have our 'light rail' project. It's just a commuter line, not even high speed rail. It's been going for something like 20 years already and not projected to be completed until around 2041.

That is just for one state. It is ludicrous to put forward the idea that the US could build a high speed rail system like Japan's, something we have zero experience with, in only 10 years, let alone a system broad enough to replace the majority of domestic air travel.

These projects are pipe dreams that simply aren't possible and anyone buying into them is just as naive as the people coming up with the initiatives. Looking at this initiative is like looking at a child's crayon drawing.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

You disappoint me, bass. I thought Americans had the confidence and audacity to do anything they put their mind to. Kennedy got a man on the moon in less than 7 years. You don't believe American ingenuity can clean its act up in 10 years?

Of course I believe in American ingenuity, but this is something totally different and totally abstract. Personally, I have always supported alternative fuel sources, but we’re aren’t there yet and there’s nothing that is sustainable or long term reliable as of now. Add to that, we need a fuel source that can keep a plane in the sky as well as ships, cars running. Also, who’s going to pay for all this? If it comes from private donations, sign me up, but to put that on the tax payer, i don’t agree with that at all.

Yes, the Earth will survive. The Earth can take all the crap that's chucked at it, and dish out a lot more. That isn't the problem. We are the ones that won't survive, unless we change.

To a certain point I do agree we need to change, but if we have to hurry because there is impending doom and gloom, not quite buying it and I don’t believe this will happen within the next 12 years either.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

@Anonymous

The above ISN’T a “Hyperbolic Talking Point”. It is what the New Green Deal proposes.

@David Varnes

And? Nothing in the entire 14 page document, which is easy to find online in PDF form, says anything about eliminating air travel (which has been suggested numerous times on this thread), nor about tearing down anything.

If you read my post carefully, you will note it refers to that one statement within a longer post. I referred to a “single example”. Do you actually think that “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States” is a minor proposal?

If you insist on using the language of a rant, I suggest locking yourself in a sound-proof room, lie on the floor and pound your fists on it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Do you actually think that “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States” is a minor proposal?

I think that it's a proposal that is quite minor, since it is basically saying new building codes.

Ooooh, new building codes. That's a major proposal for sure!

As for using the language of a rant, I suggest reading the comments on this thread, which include the hyperbolic comments such as banning air travel, tearing down all buildings in the United States, and more. Then decide who needs to go into a sound proof room and pound their fists.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

And? Nothing in the entire 14 page document, which is easy to find online in PDF form, says anything about eliminating air travel (which has been suggestd numerous times on this thread), nor about tearing down anything.

Statements such as that are, by definition, hyperbole. It's taking a idea and boiling it down to a fear laden, hyperbolic and hyper partisan talking point to feed out in pablum pill form to those who cannot even take the time to read a 14 page document.

Put that together with a good dose of "SOCIALISM! Hide yur kids, hide your wives, it's SOCIALISM!" and you have a nice opiate for the conservative masses.

You're wrong! We love those lunatics espousing socialism!

Here's a summary from the Wall Street Journal (which should be beneficial for low-information voters):

The Socialist That Could

 Kimberley A. Strassel, Wall Street Journal 

The Republican Party has a secret weapon for 2020. It’s especially effective because it’s stealthy: The Democrats seem oblivious to its power. And the GOP needn’t lift a finger for it to work. All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch 29-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez . . . exist.

AOC, as she’s better known, today exists largely in front of the cameras. In a few months she’s gone from an unknown New York bartender to the democratic socialist darling of the left and its media hordes. Her megaphone is so loud that she rivals Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the face of the Democratic Party. Republicans don’t know whether to applaud or laugh. Most do both.

For them, what’s not to love? She’s set off a fratricidal war on the left, with her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, this week slamming the “radical conservatives” among the Democrats holding the party “hostage.” She’s made friends with Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s Labour Party, who has been accused of anti-Semitism. She’s called the American system of wealth creation “immoral” and believes government has a duty to provide “economic security” to people who are “unwilling to work.” As a representative of New York, she’s making California look sensible.

On Thursday Ms. Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her vaunted Green New Deal, complete with the details of how Democrats plan to reach climate nirvana in a mere 10 years. It came in the form of a resolution, sponsored in the Senate by Massachusetts’ Edward Markey, on which AOC is determined to force a full House vote. That means every Democrat in Washington will get to go on the record in favor of abolishing air travel, outlawing steaks, forcing all American homeowners to retrofit their houses, putting every miner, oil rigger, livestock rancher and gas-station attendant out of a job, and spending trillions and trillions more tax money. Oh, also for government-run health care, which is somehow a prerequisite for a clean economy.

It’s a GOP dream, especially because the media presented her plan with a straight face—as a legitimate proposal from a legitimate leader in the Democratic Party. Republicans are thrilled to treat it that way in the march to 2020, as their set-piece example of what Democrats would do to the economy and average Americans if given control. The Green New Deal encapsulates everything Americans fear from government, all in one bonkers resolution.

It is for starters, a massive plan for the government to take over and micromanage much the economy. Take the central plank, its diktat of producing 100% of U.S. electricity “through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources” by 2030. As Ron Bailey at Reason has noted, a 2015 plan from Stanford envisioning the goal called for the installation of 154,000 offshore wind turbines, 335,000 onshore wind turbines, 75 million residential photovoltaic (solar) systems, 2.75 million commercial solar systems, and 46,000 utility-scale solar facilities. AOC has been clear it will be government building all this, not the private sector.

And that might be the easy part. According to an accompanying fact sheet, the Green New Deal would also get rid of combustion engines, “build charging stations everywhere,” “upgrade or replace every building in U.S.,” do the same with all “infrastructure,” and crisscross the nation with “high-speed rail.”

Buried in the details, the Green New Deal also promises government control of the most fundamental aspects of private life. The fact sheet explains why the resolution doesn’t call for “banning fossil fuels” or for “zero” emissions across the entire economy—at least at first. It’s because “we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast” (emphasis mine).

This is an acknowledgment that planes don’t run on anything but fossil fuel. No jet fuel, no trips to see granny. It’s also an acknowledgment that livestock produce methane, which has led climate alarmists to engage in “meatless Mondays.” AOC may not prove able to eradicate “fully” every family Christmas or strip of bacon in a decade, but that’s the goal.

Finally, the resolution is Democratic math at its best. It leaves out a price tag, and is equally vague on what kind of taxes would be needed to cover the cost. But it would run to tens of trillions of dollars. The fact sheet asserts the cost shouldn’t worry anyone, since the Federal Reserve can just “extend credit” to these projects! And “new public banks can be created to extend credit,” too! And Americans will get lots of “shared prosperity” from their “investments.” À la Solyndra.

At least some Democrats seem to be aware of what a danger this is, which is why Ms. Pelosi threw some cold water on the Green New Deal this week. They should be scared. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a freight train gaining speed by the day—and helping Republicans with every passing minute.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Going green and protecting the environment are needed endeavors and I applaud those who promote these policies, if sincere.

However pushing to achieve those stated goals within 10 years is very unrealistic, will cost a fortune and will negatively impact workers.

I suspect that much of this touting of a Green Deal is just hot air. It's not based on realism and genuine concern for the welfare of the people.

Socialism does promise and delivers economic equality, the problem is everyone is EQUALLY POOR. Remember communist Russia, Eastern Europe, Venezuela, etc. Socialists/communists don't really love us. They only want power and control.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Many will say socialist democracies work. Maybe they do. I don’t feel like looking it up but what kind of debt spending is Sweden and Norway in?

Anyway, so this New Yorker has a 10 year green plan. What is it with socialists and their 5 year 10 year plans? Mao tried it. Stalin tried it. This is where socialism falls apart IMO, with their acceleration of plans. Sweden and Norway, not so much. I could be wrong.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

bottom line.....

non-binding resolution

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If we want to keep the planet habitable, we need to change the way we do things.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Typical socialistic, secular humanist philosophy, to care more about trees and animals than people.

These people generally don't care about you or me. Most of them just want power. When they get it they will be dictating everything and our freedoms including speech and thought will be gone.

Ignore them.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

https://japantoday.com/category/world/snowstorm-buries-northwest-with-more-on-the-way

I thought it was only ignorant orange fools who believed cold weather in winter 'disproves' global warming.

Disappointed in you, Serrano.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I thought it was only ignorant orange fools who believed cold weather in winter 'disproves' global warming.

Disappointed in you, Serrano.

I was just teasing, cleo. Sorry. Look, I know humans are accelerating the current natural global warming and we should try to cut C02 emissions, but in the end we can't stop it. We need to come up with ways to deal with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, to put it simply... it's too late. A few days ago I posted how I know of a "WMD" that would terrify even the most war-mongering leader/government in the world. I may as well say what it is because, it's already begun.

Because of certain people in humanity that believe that money is more important than practically EVERYTHING. Now it is going to payback time and all hell is going to break loose. Imagine being unable to have food to eat, no cattle, no plants, no air to breathe... All because humanity is too consumed with greed, lust for power, and ultimately major wealth. Countries will go to war over remaining food/water/oxygen resources instead of doing the smart thing of working together to maybe salvage our current state if there is ANY chances left.

Here is where it all begins for life on this planet's downfall. Humanity helped create this, and now it is time for the extinction process of everything.

https://www.businessinsider.com/insects-dying-off-sign-of-6th-mass-extinction-2019-2

Anyone with half a mind will understand this is end times apocalyptic @#@$@%@ that humanity brought about it's own destruction because of it's self destructive tendencies.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How about we stick on topic, instead, for a change? Speaking of which; climate.

The evidence is all around us. It's happening now. Why are you in denial?

I’m not in denial, I just don’t believe the garbage the way liberals believe, the earth has been here for billions....billions of years it survived a lot of crap, this old girl can dish out a lot, it survived a few meteor crashes and now I’m supposed to believe because some loon socialist is telling me in 12 years we will all be dead. Having people like that in office makes me nervous spouting that nonsense.

Making millions of what junk?

Yes, in America when we had Obama as President all of his expensive government pet projects crashed and burned and went bankrupt, so I believe in this, if the socialists want to experiment and try to come up with an alternative energy source, more power to them as long as it’s funded through the “private sector”, go for it and I’ll support it

Is renowned naturalist Sir David Attenborough talking nonsense?

Who?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Maybe you should take Trump's advice, get out of states turned liberal (like NY) if you don't like it there.

And so I did, love Texas. With the exception of Austin, it’s a great normal place, trying to get the rest of my family out of the once great State of California, they can keep their billionaires, homeless and sanctuary cities and law breakers. Good luck to them

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Cleo, I hate to break it to you but we could go back to the Stone Age and stop all burning of fossil fuels and if Mother Nature wants it the Earth is gonna heat up or cool down like it has before the first human figured out how to start a fire

What are your points of contention with the vast majority of climate scientists and what are your credentials? A link to Tucker Carlson won’t cut it.

Also when the sun’s done, we’re done

Billions of years away. The life on the earth at that time, if there is any, very probably will not include humans. The near future is much more worth contemplating and trashing this planet isn’t a good idea.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

This policy will not ban air travel. Let's keeps it slightly honest.

The GOP has no plan to address the dwindling supply of oil beyond use it up more quickly.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The unhinged are so desperate and hateful that they'd agree to a plan to have themselves swim in their shorts back to the states for vacation, because a bartender with radical socialist ideas suddenly has this "bright" idea to abolish airlines.

This nobody has accomplished nothing in her young life and will be gone in a month out of her 15 seconds in the spotlight. Even her own party thinks she's a looney egomaniac.

Get a hold of your senses already!

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

You were talking about the past warmings and coolings prior to the first human starting a fire. The cause obviously was natural progression, like I said.

Those events had causes, be they volcanic eruptions, changes in the earth's orbit, meteor impacts etc. There is nothing we can do about that.

But in the current absence of those factors, it is human activity that is currently changing the climate, not 'Mother Nature'. And with several billion more humans on the way in the next century, it makes sense to look for energy alternatives other to the ones that science has proven is leading to rising temperatures, because 'Mother Nature' can't help us if we destroy her at this rate.

I agree we should try to cut C02 emissions but we can't just stop burning fossil fuels and kill all the cows.

If you agree that C02 emissions need to be cut it would seem that you agree that human activity has a significant effect.

but we can't just stop burning fossil fuels

Why not? The world is working towards this, with or without the current bunch of Luddites in the White House.

and kill all the cows.

I fear the cows will all meet their usual ending.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

blacklabel: Don’t have to have our own plan. 

I wasn't expecting you to actually present a GOP/Trump plan for the environment. Or healthcare. The GOP doesn't really deal in big policy anymore. They're there to sign people up for the war against socialists who will destroy the country.

Much more important.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

It’s weird black label is whining about obstruction by the opposition party after they did it for eight years of the Obama administration. He for some reason think the democrats would not use what the Republicans showed to be a winning strategy.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Yeah, I thought it was weird to bring up the "all you do is obstruct" talking point in a thread about a comprehensive plan the Dems put forward. But then again in the Bezos thread they were talking about his cheating as if Donald Trump never existed, so.... It's that disconnect they have.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

15,897 votes. That’s all it took the bartender to get elected to Congress. That’s not a mandate for anything.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

If we were to actually impose the New Green Deal the United States would very quickly no longer be a major economic player. That's a guarantee. If you look at how it's going to be paid for it essentially equates to just massively printing trillions of dollars hyper inflating the currency.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Great. Then come here and post that the GOP are obstructionists and it's allowed. Instead you came here saying Democrats are obstructionists in an article where they are leading the legislation.

At this point you can basically just mess with them, because they've contradicted themselves on pretty much everything they've ever said or done. So we can play it out to them now no matter what they do.

Give a man enough rope.... well they've been given more than enough.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

If we were to actually impose the New Green Deal the United States would very quickly no longer be a major economic player . 

Right? The most technologically advanced player in the world, with the biggest and most advanced companies, research budgets, scientists and consumers should be focusing more on coal and oil and getting bogged down in endless middle eastern conflicts. Makes sense.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

If we were to actually impose the New Green Deal the United States would very quickly no longer be a major economic player. That's a guarantee.

It's a guarantee because you say so? You literally don't back up this assertion with anything other than your say so. No explanation of how exactly this will result in that end.

If you look at how it's going to be paid for it essentially equates to just massively printing trillions of dollars hyper inflating the currency.

Again, an assertion with literally zero argument to support it.

Sounds like you're just making a bunch of wild evil sounding predictions, without actually understanding that which you are condemning, nor even how the result you state will happen will come around.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Musashi, you just posted a ranting OPINION piece from one of the most conservative opinion pages in the United States.

I'm referring to the actual 14 page document that was actually submitted to the US House of Representatives.

Yet you call me low-info?

Amusing... not worth a laugh, but amusing.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@David Varnes

As for using the language of a rant, I suggest reading the comments on this thread, which include the hyperbolic comments such as banning air travel, tearing down all buildings in the United States, and more. Then decide who needs to go into a sound proof room and pound their fists.

Good point. You will have plenty of company in that room.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@bass4funk

Is renowned naturalist Sir David Attenborough talking nonsense?

Who?

-3( +3 / -6 )

He has been documenting Life on Earth all his life, the programs go out on the BBC.

He is now very wise on these matters, he is now in his nineties, Sir David Attenborough !

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@serrano AOC is the greatest gift ever to the Republicans.

AOC's going to take away your airplanes, cars, guns, and buildings - fear her! hahahahahahaha oh my

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Solar and Wind doesn't work on any level on large scale energy production if you want to have an economy and life during night.

you should probably look up molten salt

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Socialism does promise and delivers economic equality, the problem is everyone is EQUALLY POOR.

Nah, the leaders of these socialist countries still get the goods.

I can’t wait to take the AOC Bullet Train from N.Y. to Hawaii!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

renewable energy source -- heat -- melt salt -- molten salt says hot overnight -- runs turbines -- creates electricity. Or keep it and use it later like a battery, depending how long it lasts.

Every house can do that

If you wanted to

Huge stations in Spain and elsewhere have 500C molten salt reactors that generate power 24/7 from solar arrays. You could put a few of those in the USA somewhere.

If you wanted to

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Pumped storage is a real possibility in Japan compared to other nations given its population proximity to mountains across the country. Japan's geothermal opportunities abound and don't have to be giant plants but can be local self powered towns. 5m down it's 12C. There's your air conditioning and baseload

We'll discover one day we live on a planet that already provides what we need. We just needed to listen

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I don’t believe this will happen within the next 12 years either

This being global warming? Look around you, it's happening already.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

We traveled in the Mediterranean and noticed the many white rooftops. I think they learned thousands of years ago the benefit of a white, or at least light-colored, rooftop, even if they don't have air conditioning.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yes. I use electricity genearated from fossil fuels as I don’t have a choice and don’t want to freeze to death or die of heatstroke, but I think we should be doing everything possible to move away from burning fossil fuels.

Maybe you and few hundred of your best friends should hope in private jets and fly half-way around the world to have a discussion about how everyone else is killing the planet. That would be an awesome display of "doing everything possible".

I'll believe it's an emergency when they start acting like it is. And, as long as any-single-one of them take nuclear power off the table, and they ARE, then their "alarm" can't be taken seriously.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Cleo is right. Cold weather doesn't disprove global warming. However, the opposite is ALSO true: hot weather doesn't PROVE global warming either.

As for Rep. OccasioCortez, she perfectly represents her generation. Knowledge a mile wide and an inch deep. Messy facts can't be allowed to prevail over powerful feelings.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Knowledge a mile wide and an inch deep.

Ironic that in a post started with doubting climate scientists who dedicate their lives to studying the matter, favoring instead an American political ideology, you would then whine about someone with 'knowledge a mile wide and an inch deep'. It's almost as if you were purposefully trolling us. But I don't believe you did that on purpose.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

end fossil fuel era

Um, sounds good, but the technology is not there to replace burning fossil fuels.

And this 10-year New Green Deal... good grief...

A government-guaranteed job for everyone...

Upgrade every building in America...

College education for all...

Healthcare for all...

and get this - elimination of airplanes...

Hey, sounds great! ( except for the airline and related industries, lol )

Now, if only there weren't any bad people in the world and we could eliminate all military and police spending to pay for all this...

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Ocasio-Cortez is sharp and already getting to work. Makes Trump look like even more like the dithering old idiot he is. The guy is sounding more and more incoherent as the days fly by.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Already removed from her website and she contradicted herself already. This is why you don’t let 29 year old bartenders make policy for the nation.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Yes, presenting a comprehensive environmental plan is just resistance.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

People are talking about the idea of universal basic income to combat the fact that there are more people and fewer jobs in the future. Uneducated working class Trump fans should be worried as they will get replaced by automation.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I use electricity genearated from fossil fuels as I don’t have a choice and don’t want to freeze to death or die of heatstroke, but I think we should be doing everything possible to move away from burning fossil fuels.

Agreed! Gave you a thumbs-up for that one, Jimizo.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Black: Obstruction by the minority party in the House (the Republicans) is allowed.

Great. Then come here and post that the GOP are obstructionists and it's allowed. Instead you came here saying Democrats are obstructionists in an article where they are leading the legislation.

Makes no sense.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The belief that climate change is a worry not shared by 99% of the population and an issue limited to private jet owners is sickening in its stupidity. 

The belief is that issues of food on the table and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness are far more important to 99% of the people rather than this faux socialist, globalist distribution of wealth bill of goods for which you, your children and grandchildren to the 100th generation will be slaving and paying for - which, using your own words, is entirely and categorically stupid.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Green New Deal sounds like a very good idea to me.

Yeah! it sounds great as long as we can create technology that hasn't been invented yet it could work. And as long as you don't mind giving up your gas powered car and flying on airplanes and eating beef.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Solar and Wind doesn't work on any level on large scale energy production if you want to have an economy and life during night. It fails everywhere it has gone even vaguely close to being something significant. Green deal- you believe it make it true for Washington DC first with no fossil fuel support from any other sources- expect the New Green Deal will disappear on the wind.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

We could stop using all fossil fuels and kill all the cows, and the Earth's natural progression might still warm things up or produce another Ice Age.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

There was a big scale plant using molten salt- it didn't work since the energy needed to keep the salt molten exceeds the supply. Those things give horrendous expensive electricity. If energy storage was viable then coal plants would use it to allow for downtime and cut out competitors in the days they didn't have unfair restrictions.

sf2kToday  06:04 pm JST

Solar and Wind doesn't work on any level on large scale energy production if you want to have an economy and life during night.

you should probably look up molten salt

-1( +0 / -1 )

>

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Huge stations in Spain and elsewhere have 500C molten salt reactors that generate power 24/7 from solar arrays. You could put a few of those in the USA somewhere.

If you wanted to

How come AOC and the progressives haven't said anything about this great power source?

This being global warming? Look around you, it's happening already.

https://japantoday.com/category/world/snowstorm-buries-northwest-with-more-on-the-way

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The non-binding resolution outlines several goals for the United States, including meeting 100 percent of power demand from zero-emission energy sources like wind and solar within 10 years.

Yeah, good luck with that.

How does that work in, say, January in the northern hemisphere?!?!

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

The U. S. A. Will never be a socialist country.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Its more about upgrading standards, and, for those of you who live in Japan, also benefit from a similar bill which keeps cheap constructors from building crappy houses that would crumble during an earthquake.

No one is disputing that, we do that already.

It's a similar concept aimed at improving energy efficiency in current buildings while making it a standard in new ones... They aren't proposing an annihilation of the US building infrastructure...

They don’t have to advertise it, when the bill comes though....

As for airplanes, it states "overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible".

We can’t even upgrade our military, the Democrats didn’t do that for the last 8 years.

Though I too think a lot of the deal is a bit outlandish, you guys are making some pretty wild claims. If you have read it, then you're just gaslighting.

I’m from California, ground zero of the liberal echo chamber, been hearing it all my adult life.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Another reason why you have no reason to join in on this topic, unless you are just trying to gaslight.

No, I have a reason. I’m just voicing my opinion just like you.

It's like you are pretending you are the expert on astronomy but you've never heard Galileo. Christ.

No, I’m not a liberal. They’re experts on everything, above my pay grade.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Kuya: Agreed. The issue is who should provide the funding for those programs.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I don’t want to state the obvious but it might be necessary to point out that climate scientists are not burning fossil fuels.

They may not be the ones doing the burning, Jimizo, but they're heating/powering their homes and cars and flying around on planes that AOC wants to get rid of because other people are doing the burning.

Burn out the day

Burn out the night

I can't see no reason to put up a fight

I'm living for giving the devil his due

And I'm burning, I'm burning, I'm burning for you...

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Where did you get the 99% from?

Anyone who doesn't own a private jet and that most likely includes you too.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Of course none of this will happen in a 10 year period. The point is to light a fire and get folks moving in the right direction. Americans should be able to get around their region by rail easier. Planes won't go away but the effort for us all to find better ways to manage energy and uses resources will increase.

Luckily the dinosaurs like McConnell in government will be dying off in the next 10-20 years opening doors to the younger more environmentally minded folks who will be taking up the mantle for the country and the planet.

These old curmudgeons have made millions in government at the expense of the people. It is time for government to actually work for the masses more than the corporations.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

And we still have morons trying to convince us that their political ideology makes more sense than scientific investigation.

They destroy their own argument just by virtue of being stupid enough to believe it.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

This is why I wear a diaper, sit in a basement, cowering in fear that Social Democrats might save the planet

So, you actually believe that the Social Dems might save the planet... hahahahahahahahahahaha

There are so many things to be afraid of, or at least Limbaugh and Hannity tell me so everyday.

Hey, the Dems managed to take back the majority in the House despite all their BS. You never know, there's always the possibility, however small, of the voters ( legal and illegal ) having a brain fart so big that they actually regain the Senate and the White House.

FDR's we have nothing to fear but fear itself. *

Oh yeah, then we have AOC comparing herself to FDR and the manned moon missions. LOL

The Green New Deal is utterly ridiculous but hilarious. You can't make this stuff up. AOC is the greatest gift ever to the Republicans.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Go AOC! The mere mention of the woman's name makes millions of America men (especially those most easily frightened, and especially those most easily frightened by strong, intelligent women) respond like the horses in 'Young Frankenstein'.

Actually, no, she just is not that intelligent. It's made painfully obvious by watching just about any time she is interviewed and cannot answer the most basic questions about her own initiatives. What's frightening is the people who blindly follow her because she's 'cool'.

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

You do realize that wind has nothing to do with temperature, and unless there is snow on top of it, a solar panel can work as well?

Well aware of all of the models involving wind and solar and anyone that argues that they can solve the energy needs is smoking something.

There is NO way that solar, wind and renewables can meet all energy needs in all scenarios. Its impossible.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

There's nothing wasteful about saving lives around the world. You may claim you don't care but the rest of the world is not America.

Really? Let’s start with Democrats and their disastrous policies that have decimated minority communities first, get that in order, acknowledge it and address it and then we can worry about this so called Climate change.

Ah, the old you must be on drugs retort. Perhaps you could elaborate on how it will never happen but also how it might happen? Or are you hedging your bets?

Yes and it won’t happen because virtually everything we use needs oil or some modified form of fossil fuel. What about all the planes, paints, materials we need in construction or the use in robotics reader has that rely on materials made up of fossil fuel? The list is endless and if anyone can believe that moonbat AOC will end fossil fuel and turn the country green free in 10 years is being played in the worst, but hilarious way.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

This "nonsense" is effective.

Fact: Fossil fuels are a finite resource that harm the plant when combusted.

Fact: China is cornering the future market on renewable energy.

Har! Rofl. Etc.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

AOC's going to take away your airplanes, cars, guns, and buildings - fear her! 

Har! Like I said, she's the greatest gift ever to the Republicans. Even if Trump takes a dump right on the stage at the debate with whoever the Dems nominate, if AOC keeps talking, he'll still win in 2020.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The democrats 'Green New Deal' includes -- but not limited to -- the following: eliminate all fossil-fuel forms of transportation, including air travel, within 10 years: Tear down every single building in the U.S. -- commercial and residence -- and replace them with eco-friendly structures.

The upcoming democrat debates are going to be great theater as the candidates try to our "Green New Deal" each other. Kamala Harris: "10 years? I can do it in 9 years." Juan Castro: "9 years, I can do it in 5 years." Corey Booker: "5 years? My 'New Green Deal' calls for outlawing every petroleum based form of transportation and all Americans will be issued solar/wind powered jet packs on the day I'm sworn in as President." Let the democrat campaign promises begin.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

Do these democrats realize that the rest of the world will still be flying??

We'll be flying until the fossil fuels run out. Wind, solar and nuclear power is not going to keep the planes flying, are they? Isn't someone eventually going to find a way to make fusion energy work?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

No, it's called cause and effect. As in if several billion people burn all of a planets fossil fuels at an increasing rate within a geological blinking of an eye, it will have an effect on that planet.

You were talking about the past warmings and coolings prior to the first human starting a fire. The cause obviously was natural progression, like I said.

And I'm not saying humans are not having any effect on the climate, but it's insignificant compared to what the Earth does on its own. We can't stop the warming or cooling, we have to do what we can to blunt it and deal with it. I agree we should try to cut C02 emissions but we can't just stop burning fossil fuels and kill all the cows.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I use electricity genearated from fossil fuels as I don’t have a choice and don’t want to freeze to death or die of heatstroke, but I think we should be doing everything possible to move away from burning fossil fuels.

Agreed! Gave you a thumbs-up for that one, Jimizo.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

“U.S. Democrats float 'Green New Deal' to end fossil fuel era”

U.S. Democrats float 'Stand in line for Toilet Paper and Potatoes New Deal' to end free will era

FIXED

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

There has to be a less "political" and much more comprehensive approach to all these rhetoric and grandstanding by scientists and politicians alike. The "blame" game may get attention and funding to "profit" those who get the business, but not necessarily resolve the fundamental problem of man's negative impact on our mother Earth.

Curious how this post got a down vote. Must be some politicians on here who don’t wanna sacrifice their bribe mone......oops.......campaign money.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

The Green Deal appears to be a socialist initiative.

-7 ( +10 / -17 )

So getting off fossil fuel is a good thing generally but you think the goals are over optimistic. 

Not think, 110% positive.

That’s refreshing to hear when you listen to the appalling anti-science gibberish spouted by Trump, the US right and conspiracy theorists.

I worry about these clown so called scientists that are making millions of this junk.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Anything Ocasio-Cortez has come up with is nonsense. She can't even answer how to fund her plans let alone how to implement them. If someone wrote a tween fiction novel about politics, she would be the main character.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

More wasted time and money, never will be implemented.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

The American elitists may favor environmental catastrophes for us lesser mortals but we're not going to take it lying down, in the mud.

You don’t have to take it lying down, but to implement such a radical and wasteful expenditure will never happen, at least on US soil, now in Europe, I wouldn’t know or care.

Solar power, geothermal power, wind farms, hydro power it's all within our reach. Saving our children's futures is not a waste of time and money.

Yes, I agree and I think we should develop these new alternatives but to think that they will replace fossil fuel‘s within the next 10 years is smoking something, it will never, ever happen, now 25-30 maybe.

And you'll find that people will fight for their sons and daughters futures, the right not to die/starve/be driven from their lands because of greedy, corporate devils who think only of short-term and profit.

What?

-8 ( +7 / -15 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites