2020 US Election (Part One)

[onejayhawk]

Um, I think you misunderstand the document which of course is intentional in its nature. You don't want to concede to any part of it it seems to me. Its all physically possible now. Tesla already has short haul trucks that can freight massive amounts of cargo, trains can do more. You've really only have boats that require combustion and since the document calls for what is feasible now I'm not sure its required for me to address that.

Obviously you are letting perfect be the enemy of good. It is always amazing to me how this works for the right. You do this in regards to programs that help humanity and the impoverished almost constantly but when it comes to tax cuts or slashing social services you take whatever and call it good. So "it falls apart" is just you trying to call it nonsense which clearly it is not.

I do not misunderstand the document. This is just the first and most obvious question--is any of this feasible?

The answer is no. This is not quite a bill to repeal gravity but it's close enough to be a joke on its face.

J

 

[rah]

I fear seeing similar candidates will lead to similar results.

 

[Estebonrober]

I do not misunderstand the document. This is just the first and most obvious question--is any of this feasible?

The answer is no. This is not quite a bill to repeal gravity but it's close enough to be a joke on its face.

J

Not that I'm not just feeding into a line of nonsense here, but since you insist. Be specific. What is not feasible?

 

[Gori the Grey]

This is not quite a bill to repeal gravity but it's close enough to be a joke on its face.

I'm glad that when JFK announced an ambition to put a man on the moon, people didn't worry about feasibility, but set about trying to figure out how to repeal gravity instead.

Aim high. Sometimes you'll hit the moon.

 

[Farm Boy]

I had that thought. The moon was a significantly closer goal than bulldozing/reregulating every single building in the US, for one. The state is going to have to shoot people to do this. Literally. No joke.

Doesn't mean it, or something similar should not be done, but strap it down for real.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm glad that when JFK announced an ambition to put a man on the moon, people didn't worry about feasibility, but set about trying to figure out how to repeal gravity instead.

Aim high. Sometimes you'll hit the moon.

The "feasibility" whining is pathetic given that a zero-carbon economy is far more technically feasible now than "man on the moon" was when JFK announced it, or than the atom bomb was when the US government decided to start working on that.

The same people who will claim the US is exceptional because of the ingenuity and work ethic of its people seem to have no faith in those things when they are really put to the test.

The moon was a significantly closer goal than bulldozing/reregulating every single building in the US, for one.

The fact that anyone actually thinks this is hilarious. Landing a man on the moon, easier than retrofitting buildings. Funny stuff.

 

[Hygro]

The fact that anyone actually thinks this is hilarious. Landing a man on the moon, easier than retrofitting buildings. Funny stuff.

I agree with Farm Boy, retrofitting every old building is more ambitious.

 

[Lexicus]

I agree with Farm Boy, retrofitting every old building is more ambitious.

Keep in mind I was specifying technical. I agree that retrofitting every building is probably a greater political challenge, thus more ambitious overall, than the moon was. But it's not a greater technical challenge, because we already know how to do it.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Does the green new deal involve spending 5% of GDP every year for a decade?

 

[Estebonrober]

Does the green new deal involve spending 5% of GDP every year for a decade?

Back of envelope math would be considerably higher. Although if we put 5% to retrofitting every building of people who want their homes energy independent that would be a good start.

The problem here is that someone has made a bold invocation of moral action. They are right morally, inaction on the green deal's policies are basically killing your children's futures so you can have a few more hamburgers before you die, but there is middle ground to be worked out here. After all replacing beef with lab meat probably isn't ready fro scale production feasibly yet, whereas retrofitting houses was ready 10 years ago.

 

[Estebonrober]

I had that thought. The moon was a significantly closer goal than bulldozing/reregulating every single building in the US, for one. The state is going to have to shoot people to do this. Literally. No joke.

Doesn't mean it, or something similar should not be done, but strap it down for real.

This is a strawman, no one is advocating using eminent domain or some such thing to barge into people's homes and mount solar panels on them. At least I didn't catch that part. We are obviously talking about subsidizing the regulation that all future construction include it.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

I think we need more money for our military because there is an imminent threat of Vietnam, Venezuela, or Iraq invading our country. We can't let it happen!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Back of envelope math would be considerably higher. Although if we put 5% to retrofitting every building of people who want their homes energy independent that would be a good start.

The problem here is that someone has made a bold invocation of moral action. They are right morally, inaction on the green deal's policies are basically killing your children's futures so you can have a few more hamburgers before you die, but there is middle ground to be worked out here. After all replacing beef with lab meat probably isn't ready fro scale production feasibly yet, whereas retrofitting houses was ready 10 years ago.

Copy copy, just trying to calibrate expected expenditures for this versus Apollo for comparitive purposes.

 

[Farm Boy]

This is a strawman, no one is advocating using eminent domain or some such thing to barge into people's homes and mount solar panels on them. At least I didn't catch that part. We are obviously talking about subsidizing the regulation that all future construction include it.

Nah, pull your head out of your ass it smells up there "strawman" boy. I thought I read in there that it targets every single building in the US. Which kinda makes sense given the goals and the scope of thing it's trying to do, right? If it only applies to future constructions that is still monumental. I'm happy to be corrected on my understanding.

You'll note I'm not even saying we shouldn't be doing it. It wasn't an argument, but seriously put down the effing pipe if you think this is something that's simply inspirational and thinking big. It's big big. That's the point.

Or, you know, this could be one of those hidden agenda things where suggesting we should grow vegetables means we should kill academics I suppose. Mu-u-ahahahah! <twirls mustache>

 

[Estebonrober]

Nah, pull your head out of your ass it smells up there "strawman" boy. I thought I read in there that it targets every single building in the US. Which kinda makes sense given the goals and the scope of thing it's trying to do, right? If it only applies to future constructions that is still monumental and I'm happy to be corrected.

Wow? You indicated that they would force by guns the implementation of the green deal. I think that is a strawman, I'm sorry if I misconstrued your intent. I certainly didn't expect that level of reply

 

[Broken_Erika]

Or, you know, this could be one of those hidden agenda things where suggesting we should grow vegetables means we should kill academics I suppose. Mu-u-ahahahah! <twirls mustache>

Victory to the K-mart Rouge!

 

[onejayhawk]

I'm glad that when JFK announced an ambition to put a man on the moon, people didn't worry about feasibility, but set about trying to figure out how to repeal gravity instead. Aim high. Sometimes you'll hit the moon.

Excellent example since it is just the opposite of what we have here. In that case, the objective was specific, focused, and along an established path. None of those apply to the Green Deal. We expected to land on the moon within a generation anyway. Kennedy pushed what was already coming forward a decade.

With the GND, there is no expectation we will ever be at zero net. If anything, there is an expectation of expanded nuclear power. Green jobs from the 2009 stimulus are essentially gone, as well as the companies that supplied them. No companies means that there is no career path for the millions of green job seekers. The whole thing is a wish list that assumes inexhaustible funds and miraculous product development.

J

 

[Estebonrober]

Excellent example since it is just the opposite of what we have here. In that case, the objective was specific, focused, and along an established path. None of those apply to the Green Deal. We expected to land on the moon within a generation anyway. Kennedy pushed what was already coming forward a decade.

With the GND, there is no expectation we will ever be at zero net. If anything, there is an expectation of expanded nuclear power. Green jobs from the 2009 stimulus are essentially gone, as well as the companies that supplied them. No companies means that there is no career path for the millions of green job seekers. The whole thing is a wish list that assumes inexhaustible funds and miraculous product development.

J

Lol its like you are stuck in 2009.

http://fortune.com/2018/02/18/renewable-energy-us-power-mix/

Again this is immediately implementable, can we get to zero net by 2030? maybe not, can we work hard and get a hell of a lot closer than we are now? Yes.

Is it a hell of a lot more important then going to the moon? Yes, and I'm a space junkie. We have to get the thermostat of the planet under our control asap.

 

[schlaufuchs]

Lol its like you are stuck in 2009.

http://fortune.com/2018/02/18/renewable-energy-us-power-mix/

Again this is immediately implementable, can we get to zero net by 2030? maybe not, can we work hard and get a hell of a lot closer than we are now? Yes.

Is it a hell of a lot more important then going to the moon? Yes, and I'm a space junkie. We have to get the thermostat of the planet under our control asap.

I have a feeling we'll be seeing this comic a lot in the coming months:

 

[Takhisis]

this could be one of those hidden agenda things where suggesting we should grow vegetables means we should kill academics I suppose.

I didn't know you were a follower of Mao's.