Norbert
TSLA will win
The differences have never been larger, at least in recent history, especially regarding CO2.
I'm not saying that to start a discussion, just to state the obvious.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Green New Deal
- Thread starter mspohr
- Start date
- Status
The differences have never been larger, at least in recent history, especially regarding CO2.
I'm not saying that to start a discussion, just to state the obvious.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I was at a Hyundai dealership last week collecting $50 to check out the Ionity line of cars and met a local woman buying an Ioniq hybrid. She was *very* clear that her motivation was saving money on her commute. That did not surprise me; I *was* surprised that she had ZERO clue how her purchase affected pollution or AGW. She was not the case of the POS who loudly declares "I do not care," but I suspect part of the overwhelming majority who do not even realize there is a problem.
Food for thought
Food for thought
juliusa
Active Member
Can you show me a chart showing a difference based on party?
On this chart, can you show me where Democrat or Republican policy had in impact?
No difference in result between the parties. Don't listen to what they say - look at the results of their policies.
Murray Energy: America's largest private coal miner files for bankruptcy - CNN
Who has done more for EV adoption in the US?
A. Democrats
B. Republicans
C. Elon Musk
Last edited:
Norbert
TSLA will win
Unfortunately, that chart is not proportional to total CO2 emissions, which went up in 2018.
CO2 emissions are a result of many factors at the federal level as well as at the level of states. Many factors are not political at all.
Eventually the planet will run out of coal and oil, but we can't wait that long.
All that should be obvious for someone trying to make a point on this forum.
Chart of the Day: Total US Carbon Emissions, 1990-2018
juliusa
Active Member
Great chart. Can you show me where the Democrats have done anything different than the Republicans? Seems to have climbed pretty steadily under Clinton and Bush, dropped with the Great Recession, then been pretty steady with Obama and Trump.
2.8% increase in 2018 under Trump. Have to go all the way back to 2010 (Obama) to find a larger annual increase. "Weather conditions and continued economic growth were the primary factors in increasing energy consumption and emissions in 2018." Not sure Trump has anything to do with the weather conditions, and you can choose Obama or Trump to credit/blame for the economic growth.
U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions increased in 2018 but will likely fall in 2019 and 2020 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
Who has done more for EV adoption in the US?
A. Democrats
B. Republicans
C. Elon Musk
Clearly Elon has done by far the most. The policies of the Ds and Rs were written by the automakers, and had no impact - they produced a few compliance cars. Only when Tesla gained traction and threatened to take market share did the other companies do anything.
Bush signed the federal tax credit for EVs - limited to 250,000 vehicles per manufacturer. Obama signed the lowering to 200,000 . It will be interesting to see if Trump signs an increase to 600,000 vehicles that has been proposed - or whether it gets passed by the Ds in the House or Rs in the Senate.
They are all basically the same - just politicians owned by the car and oil companies.
Last edited:
Norbert
TSLA will win
What the chart shows (as opposed to the one that you posted), is that we are far from having solved the problem in the US.
It is not so much R vs D, but Trump vs everyone else.
Tesla received loans based on a program created by Bush and applied by Obama which enabled building Model S production.
The federal tax credit started running out (for Tesla) just recently and wasn't replaced with anything else, I think mostly due to Trump viewing the climate change emergency as a "chinese hoax" or fake pretext for socialism.
Obviously most popular D candidates have substantial plans, and Trump doesn't.
Last edited:
Climate crisis affects how majority will vote in UK election – poll
Climate crisis affects how majority will vote in UK election – poll
Almost two-thirds of people agreed the climate emergency was the biggest issue facing humankind, with 7% disagreeing. The poll also asked if “fossil fuel companies, whose products contribute directly to climate change, should help pay for the tens of billions in damages from extreme weather events?” Two-thirds of people agreed, with 12% opposed.
In terms of action to tackle the climate emergency, 81% of people backed planting more trees, 63% supported a Green New Deal – a large-scale, long-term investment in green infrastructure and jobs – and more than half said it was important to ban fracking.
Climate crisis affects how majority will vote in UK election – poll
Almost two-thirds of people agreed the climate emergency was the biggest issue facing humankind, with 7% disagreeing. The poll also asked if “fossil fuel companies, whose products contribute directly to climate change, should help pay for the tens of billions in damages from extreme weather events?” Two-thirds of people agreed, with 12% opposed.
In terms of action to tackle the climate emergency, 81% of people backed planting more trees, 63% supported a Green New Deal – a large-scale, long-term investment in green infrastructure and jobs – and more than half said it was important to ban fracking.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Economic inequality is now literally hindering efforts to salvage our future.....
Chile cancels climate and Apec summits amid mass protests
Chile cancels climate and Apec summits amid mass protests
That assumes the climate summit would actually have accomplished something other than publicity. The cancellation is good publicity... showing how feckless our politicians are.
The climate crisis and the failure of economics
But what I take from the above analysis — from the broken price signals, future discounting, and corrupt politics that have heretofore blocked the path forward — is that something big, different, and oriented toward both future crises and present injustices is required.
Instead, the GND puts action against climate change in an immediate and broad social justice context that recognizes the urgency of present needs — better jobs (many in green sectors, a way in which action on climate can be pro-growth, for the record) and health care — while plotting an ambitious course to 100 percent renewable and emission-free electricity in the relatively near future.
But what I take from the above analysis — from the broken price signals, future discounting, and corrupt politics that have heretofore blocked the path forward — is that something big, different, and oriented toward both future crises and present injustices is required.
Instead, the GND puts action against climate change in an immediate and broad social justice context that recognizes the urgency of present needs — better jobs (many in green sectors, a way in which action on climate can be pro-growth, for the record) and health care — while plotting an ambitious course to 100 percent renewable and emission-free electricity in the relatively near future.
Why migration policy needs to be part of the GND.
Post-Capitalists Must Understand the Role of Migration in Global Capitalism - Resilience
What does need recognition, however, is a global regime of labour mobility which overly determines the character of migration as people finds themselves constrained by the destruction of livelihoods at home, narrow and unstable channels of migration, arbitrary and violent border and detention systems, and labour markets that are structured to enable firms’ ‘bottom line’ at any cost to working people. The vast majority of economic migrants have not become so by choice.
In capitalist production, unending demands for natural resources, land and labour at lower costs creates structural migration as people are compelled to move from one place to another for work. Concerted labour policies such as, historically, the slave trade, colonial or apartheid-type labour regimes, and now many guestworker programmes and selective immigration regimes with varying restrictions on citizenship and legality, are a constant feature of capitalist development in wealthy economies.
Post-Capitalists Must Understand the Role of Migration in Global Capitalism - Resilience
What does need recognition, however, is a global regime of labour mobility which overly determines the character of migration as people finds themselves constrained by the destruction of livelihoods at home, narrow and unstable channels of migration, arbitrary and violent border and detention systems, and labour markets that are structured to enable firms’ ‘bottom line’ at any cost to working people. The vast majority of economic migrants have not become so by choice.
In capitalist production, unending demands for natural resources, land and labour at lower costs creates structural migration as people are compelled to move from one place to another for work. Concerted labour policies such as, historically, the slave trade, colonial or apartheid-type labour regimes, and now many guestworker programmes and selective immigration regimes with varying restrictions on citizenship and legality, are a constant feature of capitalist development in wealthy economies.
Forged in Fire: California’s Lessons for a Green New Deal
The intersecting hardships experienced by so many in the region also explain why, days before the one-year anniversary of the deadly Camp Fire that burned down Paradise and killed 86 people, local politicians in neighboring Chico unveiled a plan calling for the small city to adopt its own Green New Deal.
Chico shows that there is no way to cope with climate breakdown without a simultaneous shift to a very different kind of economy, one that is willing to make major nonmarket investments in housing, transit, health (including mental health), water, electricity, and more.
The intersecting hardships experienced by so many in the region also explain why, days before the one-year anniversary of the deadly Camp Fire that burned down Paradise and killed 86 people, local politicians in neighboring Chico unveiled a plan calling for the small city to adopt its own Green New Deal.
Chico shows that there is no way to cope with climate breakdown without a simultaneous shift to a very different kind of economy, one that is willing to make major nonmarket investments in housing, transit, health (including mental health), water, electricity, and more.
Oh please..Sanders has never done anything in his whole life except..get elected. He is the problem. He lives to get elected and lives off the govt tax and ensures his wife is overly well paid from tax dollars He is a travesty and would be the one person who'd have me voting for Trump. I despise Trump. I served...I have complete contempt for him and his enablers. Hell I think he's guilty of treason.
And I would still vote for him before Sanders. Sanders is a complete fraud. He's never done anything but talk. Nothing. Even Trump has done something...much as I hate him.
And as green as I am I do not see any sign that a "green new deal" is something workable. If it is simple, like simply putting electric on roofs, having tesla solar roofs made at scale, pushing milage requirements, etc than I see workable solutions. Some of the green new deal stuff will absolutely lose the election for dems if they persist. If the green new deal is a giant welfare scheme than count me out.
Would be nice to see a green personal pedigree. 4 years ago we had some record of this with what vehicles presidential candidates were driving then, but have not seen an update:
What Does Your Presidential Candidate Drive?
What Does Your Presidential Candidate Drive?
Ha, not quite, close though. Still doesn't change the fact that as for me and my entire family (3 brothers- none of boomers -
)and democrat voting independent friends in Northern VA ....no one trusts Sanders. Warren is viewed as ...unelectable. At least she's done something. Now Sanders...there is a fraud.
d21mike
Active Member
I agree with you. However, I am a Boomer with 5 grandkids and discuss these issues with mostly democratic kids. I am a business owner (still) and I drive 2 Teslas and just installed solar (w/Power Walls). The only democrat I like is Tulsi. I do not think Warren has a chance (at least I really hope not) and would be surprised if Bernie does either. I believe we should transition to renewables ASAP. As Yang said when asked by CNN are you going to "force" people to drive (less power and slower electric cars) he replied with "your are going to LOVE to drive your electric cars" Meaning that it is something many people do not know they always wanted to drive. But what has been proposed so far is a sham. The GND is about wealth re-distribution and will be rejected my many including me because it is not about us moving to renewables as the goal. And for Medicare for All. I am for providing Medicare to everyone. BUT, why not just offer Medicare as it is and not replace it? Bernie has said many times the Medicare is the most popular of all medical coverage yet he wants to completely replace it. I actually think we could afford Medicare (as it is NOW) for All if that was the direction. As anyone on Medicare knows it is partially private insurance which for Bernie is a sin.Ha, not quite, close though. Still doesn't change the fact that as for me and my entire family (3 brothers- none of boomers -
Sorry Boomer. Your fact free, irrational rant is just a sad old white guys lament trying to hold onto a past that never was staring dumbstruck at a future you don't understand.Ha, not quite, close though. Still doesn't change the fact that as for me and my entire family (3 brothers- none of boomers -
juliusa
Active Member
They have plans that will go nowhere, just like all their other plans.
Tell me again what President Obama accomplished - other than reducing the EV credit from 250,000 vehicles to 200,000 vehicles?
Here's an explanation of part of your confusion
Democracy doesn’t matter to the defenders of ‘economic freedom’
Democracy doesn’t matter to the defenders of ‘economic freedom’ | Quinn Slobodian
According to its historical overview, the second freest economy in the world in 1975 was Honduras, a military dictatorship. For the next year, another dictatorship, Guatemala, was in the top five. These were no anomalies. They expressed a basic truth about the indexes. The definition of freedom they used meant that democracy was a moot point, monetary stability was paramount and any expansion of social services would lead to a fall in the rankings. Taxation was theft, pure and simple, and austerity was the only path to the top.
“The ‘right’ to food, clothing, medical services, housing or a minimal income level,” the authors wrote, was nothing less than “‘forced labor’ requirements [imposed] on others.”
Pinochet, Thatcher and Reagan may be dead. But economic freedom indexes carry the neoliberal banner by deeming the goals of social justice forever illegitimate and pushing states to regard themselves solely as guardians of economic power. Stephen Moore, who was a favourite earlier this year for Trump’s appointment to the Federal Reserve Board, put the matter simply. “Capitalism is a lot more important than democracy,” he said in an interview. “I’m not even a big believer in democracy.” Hong Kong’s financial secretary made much the same argument two weeks ago in London, when he cited the city’s top economic freedom ranking and reassured his audience that “alongside the protests, the business of business rolls on, unabated”.
Democracy doesn’t matter to the defenders of ‘economic freedom’
Democracy doesn’t matter to the defenders of ‘economic freedom’ | Quinn Slobodian
According to its historical overview, the second freest economy in the world in 1975 was Honduras, a military dictatorship. For the next year, another dictatorship, Guatemala, was in the top five. These were no anomalies. They expressed a basic truth about the indexes. The definition of freedom they used meant that democracy was a moot point, monetary stability was paramount and any expansion of social services would lead to a fall in the rankings. Taxation was theft, pure and simple, and austerity was the only path to the top.
“The ‘right’ to food, clothing, medical services, housing or a minimal income level,” the authors wrote, was nothing less than “‘forced labor’ requirements [imposed] on others.”
Pinochet, Thatcher and Reagan may be dead. But economic freedom indexes carry the neoliberal banner by deeming the goals of social justice forever illegitimate and pushing states to regard themselves solely as guardians of economic power. Stephen Moore, who was a favourite earlier this year for Trump’s appointment to the Federal Reserve Board, put the matter simply. “Capitalism is a lot more important than democracy,” he said in an interview. “I’m not even a big believer in democracy.” Hong Kong’s financial secretary made much the same argument two weeks ago in London, when he cited the city’s top economic freedom ranking and reassured his audience that “alongside the protests, the business of business rolls on, unabated”.
- Status
Similar threads
