It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An honest question for proponents of the "New Green Deal".

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: links234

So obviously from the moniker under your user name “American Socialist”, you are in favor of this insane plan?
AOC can’t seem to explain where the money is going to come from, can you?


They secretly plan on taxing the rich in other countries !! 😎


I can’t wait for the Green Dream to happen, I am tired of working for a living...I want the government to give me everything for free.




posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:10 PM
link   
OK folks, it's time to cap and trade this Democrat BS hoodwink.

Guess what......we already use close to 20% renewable energy 😃

And I bet it's all because of **Capitalist Enterprise** !!

So why are Democrats so belligerent ?

Because they're desperate phonies that's why 😎

((article from 1 year ago))
Renewable Energy Surges to 18% of U.S. Power Mix💥🐔💥




posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

A new electric car economy is possible if they take all Republicans and have them run on giant hamster wheel generators. The older ones though just plug them straight into the giant Matrix inspired power plants.

This already happened some years ago actually.




posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

Tidal? Geothermal? Magic?



The Liberal Matrix runs on Unicorn Farts. They pump their tires full of the stuff and they propel by self-satisfaction alone from then on.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Is there seriously a proposal in this thing to eliminate the internal combustion engine?

Disregarding personal automobiles, how do they plan on shipping all of these new products and as yet to be identified replacement technologies?

Trucks, trains, cargo ships all utilize the internal combustion engine.

It's kind of like the clean up at Fukushima Daiichi, the technology does not yet exist to make any of what they propose happen.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Don't you get it? The technology will exist because they will pass a law that says it will happen in 10 years. It's like magic!



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Whole lot of crazy talk here. Let's be realistic, there's only one way to make this work. We need to send the marines into Wakanda and seize the vibranium.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: links234

So obviously from the moniker under your user name “American Socialist”, you are in favor of this insane plan?
AOC can’t seem to explain where the money is going to come from, can you?


First, yes. Second, 'she can't seem to explain' because no one's put a price tag on it because this isn't a bill or a policy proposal. It's a nonbinding resolution that says, 'this is what we want to achieve' and not 'this is how we achieve these goals.'

Someone mentioned it earlier and is spot on; it's a litmus test for 2020 Democratic candidates.



posted on Feb, 7 2019 @ 11:37 PM
link   
the biggest problem right now is storage, we produce plenty from solar, wind, etc to power much of America and it increases every year, but most of that is being wasted because we can't store it anywhere and it's driving up costs because the peak power plants and being forced to run longer, these peak plants are also much more polluting than regular power plants.

we already have too much green power and the more we add the more expensive power is going to get, it's also creating more pollution and putting greater strain on the grid, it's making us need more power in the end, creating a vicious cycle.

not only that but this green deal shows great ignorance of new and upcoming technology that is turning fossil fuels into reusable zero polluting energy by capturing it before being able to get into the air and allowing us to recycle it. the carbon era isn't over yet and it's also going green, if only people would chill out and let the technology advance properly.

my biggest upset with all this green revolution garbage is that the people going on about it are why nuclear power has been suppressed for decades, why carbon based fuels dominate everything, why we have such problems with pollution, they created this mess with their fear mongering about nuclear power. if not for them nuclear power would be so much safer, efficient, more powerful, and reusable, we'd be set for millions of years and have very little pollution, aside from certain industries.

we already have the best solution yet nobody seems to give a damn, putting politics and money above simple solutions, on both sides, seriously these green extremists can go shove it, damn hypocrites.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 01:34 AM
link   
...And even though broadband internet has been around since—what, 2000?—there are still rural areas where the only service is still 56k dial-up and the phone companies have flatly said they're never going to lay cable for DSL. Unbelievable but true.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 04:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Lumenari

yeah .

cause all this sky is falling crap thats going to happen is never going to happen.

it reads to me like that anyway

nothing to say about any of that right?

figures


So you really are out of the loop on this.

The nonbinding bill is currently being used as a litmus test for 2020 Democratic Presidential hopefuls.

Politically, it actually is a big deal... it is something that will also probably split the Democratic party apart, causing some rather large ramifications.

So no, it is not a "sky is falling" thing.

It will however fundamentally transform American politics for decades to come.

This is the actual Progressive Agenda, naked and for all to see after about 100 years of hiding until they thought it had enough political power to just push it past the finish line.

Fun times.

Think harder.



but your 'honest question' was how is this going to work

the answer is its not
its not even supposed to

so why are you not dropping it?

probably cause you dont want honest answers
you just want to keep talking # and circle jerking .

you asked. it was answered yet here we are

spread that fear and propaganda lumenari

youre very good at it



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

We're not dropping it because this idiot is in Congress and laid this out as a policy proposal as if these goals should guide serious legislation going forward.

You said it yourself -- THIS IS NOT REALISTIC. This is not intended to work, but she wants every bill passed to be written within this framework, with these unicorn fart goals in mind to guide them. When the end result of what she wants is total disaster, this is completely crazy, but she's in congress because most people, at least the ones who voted for her, are apparently too stupid to think that far.
edit on 8-2-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Just think of all the fossil fuels that would be consumed to rebuild all these buildings. It would take 100 million years to recoup the clean energy savings used to complete the proposed work. Yes, I guess-timated.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I think the real root of the problem is....

Democrats have a difficult time "connecting" with voters because of "how smart we are" that "we know so much."


The percentage of people that are actually entertaining her shear stupidity should tell you something about the intellegence within the Democratic Party. This really is as stupid as stupid gets.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: mtnshredder

I think it more likely that Democrats have a difficult time connecting with voters because more and more often these days, they have different goals than voters do. Intelligence has little to do with it on either end.
edit on 8-2-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

so the idea is to get people talking about this, but you don't want anyone saying anything against the thing you say isn't realistic? I invite you to take another look at your platform here and decide if you have anything to offer, or just like to troll, as you have said before. Either is fine, but own it, don't be a wuss.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: mtnshredder

I think it more likely that Democrats have a difficult time connecting with voters because more and more often these days, they have different goals than voters do. Intelligence has little to do with it on either end.


We'll have to agree to disagree. If voters are electing officials into office to represent them and the officials have different goals and ideologies than the people who elected them, then I would have to say, intelligence has everything to do with it. Why the hell would you elect someone to represent you, that doesn't have similar goals as you do? That makes absolutely no sense at all.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

I wish I had the time to answer your questions in detail. I actually like and enjoy many of your posts.

The truth is that AOC'a GND is, by her own admission, a WIP, (work in progress); its called a "working paper), non-binding resolution. I have spent the better part of 2 days researching this thing and recognize its flawed in many respects. To better understand it, see:
www.sunrisemovement.org...

That the goals are largely unattainable is probably less important than the fact that the proposal itself is widely supported by millenials and that expressing support for it is becoming a litmus test for 2020 Democrat POTUS candidates. They are near required to sign off on this. The true dannnger is that these proposals will force compromise proposals that will slowly work to destroy the US economy. As one commentator pointed out, the proposal is less significant than the fact that there hasn't been any public push back by sane politicians.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
She is very Venezuelan in some ways with her ideas about government control of society.

Here is Venezuelan free health care.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

If the litmus test is backing a fantasy, it doesn't bode too well for our future. Even as a "starting point for discussion" , it is fundamentally flawed, because to have a real, honest, and productive discussion, we shouldn't start so distantly divorced from reality.
I'd love to see a green economy. No one is against that. But let's start with ideas that might be plausible and that wouldn't require the collapse of the economy and a complete government takeover of all aspects of our lives.







 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join