Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

The goal of the green new deal

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Jul 12, 2019.

  1. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator VIP Member

    104,156
    11,337
    3,683
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  2. orangeblue_coop

    orangeblue_coop GC Hall of Fame

    1,251
    320
    363
    Nov 19, 2016
    ConservativeMedia.US is a great source of non-biased news from a fair viewpoint.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Rocinante

    Rocinante Junior

    165
    70
    313
    May 28, 2013
    • Dislike Dislike x 4
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    392
    413
    May 31, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    You’d better find a way to kill off a solid portion of the population first. So how bad do you want it?
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 2
  5. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    64,978
    10,253
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    The don't get it.... The masse death that happens with forced governmental change is real murder by the thugs! By the thousands... I hope we can save ourselves from that hate...
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 8, 2007
  7. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    2,942
    297
    378
    Aug 14, 2007
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. gatorchamps0607

    gatorchamps0607 Always Rasta Premium Member

    48,350
    129,761
    1,968
    Aug 14, 2007
    Hendersonville, TN
    Yeah, it's worked out so well for everyone else that has tried it. Let's be the next country in line to fail because of it.. Sounds fun.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  9. wrpgator

    wrpgator GC Hall of Fame

    2,664
    4,860
    528
    Dec 12, 2013
    BS: This "The US spends 10X more on fossil fuel subsidies than education" Total made up Bovine Scatology.
    The writer also lies by using Federal education dollars only apparently; far more money is spent by the states, about $600 billion vs. about $50 billion by the Feds. So he massively takes away from one side of the equation while piling on the other side all sorts of made up 'costs':
    Per your link, "The study includes the negative externalities caused by fossil fuels that society has to pay for, not reflected in their actual costs. In addition to direct transfers of government money to fossil fuel companies, this includes the indirect costs of pollution, such as healthcare costs and climate change adaptation. By including these numbers, the true cost of fossil fuel use to society is reflected."
    Take out the fuzzy math and the actual amount is, depending on who you ask, between $4 billion (CFR figures) and $20 billion (Oil Change International, a progressive environmental group which includes $$ for U.S. military defending 'fossil fuel interests around the globe'). In the U.S., the aggregate amount spent on k-12 public education is about $650 billion. So, education spending is actually (let's pick the $20 billion figure for oil subsidies) (OMG!) 32.5 TIMES what is spent on fossil fuel subsidies!
    The World Spends $400 Billion Propping Up Oil Companies. Is That Bad?
    Fast Facts: Expenditures (66)
    Fossil Fuel Subsidies & Finance - Oil Change International
    "Fossil fuel subsidies in the United States also include massive military expenditures to acquire and defend fossil fuel interests around the globe."
    Keep in mind too that some of the subsidy dollars are allocated to help people on limited incomes pay their heating bills.
    Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
    "Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) helps keep families safe and healthy through initiatives that assist families with energy costs."

    The Surprising Reason That Oil Subsidies Persist: Even Liberals Love Them
    "The summary of oil-related subsidies in the U.S. for 2010 totals $4.5 billion. That is a number often put forward; $4 billion a year or so in support for those greedy oil companies. But look at the breakdown. The single largest expenditure is just over $1 billion for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which is designed to protect the U.S. from oil shortages. The second largest category is just under $1 billion in tax exemptions for farm fuel. The justification for that tax exemption is that fuel taxes pay for roads, and the farm equipment that benefits from the tax exemption is technically not supposed to be using the roads. The third largest category? $570 million for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. (This program is classified as a petroleum subsidy because it artificially reduces the price of fuel, which helps oil companies sell more of it). Those three programs account for $2.5 billion a year in 'oil subsidies'."

    The "manufacturer’s tax deduction", $1.7 billion per year for the oil industry is defined in Section 199 of the IRS code. This is a tax credit designed to keep manufacturing in the U.S., but it isn’t specific to oil companies. It is a tax credit enjoyed by highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple, and even foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S. Further, the deduction for oil companies is already limited. Apple is able to take a 9% manufacturer's tax deduction, but ExxonMobil is only allowed to take a 6% deduction."
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    11,627
    1,044
    848
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    It’s not but it’s this year’s fear mongering bogeyman. Social spending has become socialism notwithstanding ongoing private property ownership.

    Not that I’m for the green new deal, or even for many of the Dems running for Prez (I was on Klobuchar bandwagon early and she’s still largely stuck in the starters gate) but every pub on here describes government spending as “socialism” to score cheap political points when it’s nowhere close.

    By that definition the next one who says “i propose we eliminate withholding FICA from your paycheck because it’s simply a naked redistribution of wealth” will be the first one that’s not a socialist.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  11. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    392
    413
    May 31, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    Just be grateful that due to the size and strength of the middle class in this country, those who want the Revolution the most are the least capable physically of pulling it off.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    392
    413
    May 31, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    What? Don’t be daft, North. What about the provisions guaranteeing income to those “unwilling” to work? Tell me what that does to cool the planet. If this was seriously about saving us all from man-made global warming, then AOC would be conscripting the “unwilling” for ecological clean-up projects or something like that. But that doesn’t get votes, does it?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    11,627
    1,044
    848
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    I thought that was later clarified as meaning doing things like protecting pensions for those in fields being phased out who didn't necessarily have enough time on the shot clock to reinvent themselves in a new green field, i.e., mid-late aged coal miners, not just anyone who raises their hand and says "I don't feel like working today, send me a check".

    If that's daftness, then guilty as charged.
     
  14. Bazza

    Bazza GC Hall of Fame

    23,378
    5,482
    1,613
    Jan 2, 2009
    New Smyrna Beach
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Off-topic Off-topic x 1
  15. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    392
    413
    May 31, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    I’m sure someone with more sense than AOC did indeed run out and damage control (i.e. clarify) that particular note, which reads “economic security for those unable or unwilling to work” and states nothing about “as a result of the catastrophic impact these laws would have on certain industries.” Yes, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that UBI, a mainstay of the Socialist agenda, is worked into an idea that theoretically has nothing to do with Socialism and everything to do with saving the planet.

    And this statement by Chakrabarti:

    “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all. Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

    I’m sure someone is going to need to get out there and clarify that, too.

    If Socialism is so great, then why hide its introduction behind “racial justice” or “global warming” or “animal rights” or whatever? Just come right out and say:

    “Yeah, it’s unfair that certain people have had greater talent and work ethic over the generations and have amassed wealth as a result. It’s also unfair they’ve taken steps to protect their earnings and, like, pass them on to their ungrateful brats. The only way to rectify this situation is to spread misery equally and, like, hope that the people who built or invented everything we enjoy today will keep working just as hard for much less. Also hoping, of course, that the people who suddenly get something for nothing will continue to contribute to society (apart from voting correctly if we still have pro forma elections) just, you know, because. Finally, hoping that the new government ruling class we’ve installed in place of the evil “one percenters” will not just act in their own interest and use the force of law to amass the wealth that is left over, living as large as the one percenters they so despised.”

    I think it’s a great plan and would be well received by the electorate.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  16. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    11,627
    1,044
    848
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    You’re picking the wrong argument with me. I’m not saying it’s a good plan. Matter of fact I’ve said on here and in this thread and elsewhere that I don’t like the plan, nor do I like AOC. I said earlier she was a nightmare.

    But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether the GND is a form of socialism or not. I dont think it’s worth the cost, and hardly vetted enough, regardless of however it’s labeled properly or improperly.

    My comment related to the modern day genuflecting Republican response chant of “socialism” to any new social program introduced by a Democrat, yet not one Republican who makes the Socialism claim can see the irony that we already have a plethora of social programs they fully endorse (for the same votes you reference above), like FICA, or farm subsidies to offset tariffs, or free school lunches, or any of the other thousands of programs that we fund daily on a bipartisan basis that also redirect billions upon billions of dollars of earned income from one private hand to another. Yet somehow that person can’t see the irony of calling someone else a Socialist.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. PITBOSS

    PITBOSS GC Hall of Fame

    4,624
    145
    273
    Apr 13, 2007
    His quote

    “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

    Did he say anything else?
     
  18. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    392
    413
    May 31, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    Find out. Let us know.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 8, 2007
    And that's why I asked the question. There certainly can be much in the Green New Deal not to like, but that doesn't mean it's socialism. Words have meaning, and it's not "I don't know, I guess everything I don't like."

    Definition of SOCIALISM
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. wrpgator

    wrpgator GC Hall of Fame

    2,664
    4,860
    528
    Dec 12, 2013
    Being too literal here with a definition to dispel the notion that a program such as GND is "Socialism" ignores the fact of incrementalism. Creeping socialism.
    One small cut isn't death; a thousand small cuts may be. The proposal then isn't "socialism" in the literal sense, but it is certainly socialistic as advocated by people who are socialists at heart.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2019
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2