After many months of high anticipation for the revolutionary ‘Green New Deal’ by the fresh face of the Democratic Party, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the details have at long last been released to the world in the form of a six-page outline. And yes, it’s just as bad as you would have expected. Maybe a little worse.
She plans of putting the “nuts and bolts” of the plan into legislation in the coming weeks and months, but this is what to expect. She describes the Green New Deal as “a 10-year plan to mobilize every aspect of American society at a scale not seen since World War 2 to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and create economic prosperity for all.” Maybe there was a reason for mass mobilization during the ’40s, which actually presented an immediate threat. While climate change is negative very very long term, the Nazi’s posed an immediate threat to national security.
This plan would essentially kill 89% of the US energy sector, including the nuclear energy sector, which is by far the cleanest non-renewable form of energy. She will also provide “economic security” and ‘millions of union jobs’ for people displaced by her destruction of the industry. And she will implement FDR’s second bill of rights, which is a guaranteed job, free education, clean air and water, federally provided housing, destruction of big business regardless of how they grew to their size, and economic security for those “unwilling to work.”
She compares this to building the Interstate Highway System or going to the Moon and questioning how we will pay those two is as silly as questioning how we will pay for this. Except we all would have asked the same questions back then.
Because “we invested 40-50% of GDP into our economy during World War 2” we should do the same today, which would more than double our current budget. But because the plan is popular, it must be done. She falsely equates quality with popularity.
Just to clarify, “yes, we are calling for a full transition off fossil fuels and zero greenhouse gases” by ‘banning’ them from “every sector of the economy” followed by ‘building a new economy.’ Yes, AOC, let’s completely destroy and rebuild our $20 trillion economy in 10 years. The huge magnitude of shift would require the entire nation to put everything else on halt and focus full force on replacing current technology and infrastructure with technology that hasn’t even been invented yet. There is a plan to solve the ‘farting cow’ problem, and eventually eliminate planes. Guess it’s back to taking the ferry.
Luckily, no carbon tax and no real plans to use cap & trade. However, cap and trade taxes “pale in comparison to the size of the mobilization” she calls for. She also calls for the planting of trees in lieu of CCUS.
But at least she has a plan for how to pay for it… sort of. We will pay for it “the same way we paid for the New Deal, the 2008 bank bailout and extended quantitative easing programs. The same way we paid for World War II.” Essentially, racking up trillions in debt, selling bonds to Wall Street, creating new federal banks to lend to our own government, selling bonds to foreign governments as well. We won’t pay through a debt system. We simply forgo the payments to future generations. We’re already $20 trillion in debt, what’s another $20 trillion?
We will also nationalize and take a stake in the new energy sector. Another country on our continent tried that, and it didn’t work out very well. But commenting ‘Venezuela’ is too harsh, and shows we don’t care about the environment.
I’m glad she admits “even if every billionaire and company came together and were willing to pour all the resources at their disposal into this investment, the aggregate value of the investments they could make would not be sufficient.” This investment will be almost purely financed by the federal government and taxpayers.
We squeezed in a little social justice with the “promotion [of] justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of frontline and vulnerable communities.”
I agree, there is sufficient research to show humans have contributed to climate change in the last 100 or so years. Okay, but how will we solve it? Ramming trillions down the drain with unrealistic expectations of an immediate economic overhaul is not a legitimate solution.
Categories: U.S. News