AOC's grand vision .. a new Green Nation

Green New Deal

AOC and her staff have now rewritten or clarified AOC's new Green Deal given the response that it has received in, and from, many areas.  Even with the clarification or if many parts of what is known it would fundamentally change and alter the United States for generations of future Americans.  In fact, if the Democrats gain power the moves many of them would make would as well as cancel out and require a rewrite of our Constitution.  I can't say I know a lot about many of the areas that AOC and the Democrats want to change or alter but I can speak about a few of their desires and if they have a ten year period in mind then it's dead and a failure before it ever starts.  

High-Speed Rail and zero carbon emission transportation system alone is an impossibility.  For one, knowing the rail industry as I do unless you governmentalize the whole system it will never work and the government has already had a hand at railroads with Conrail and Amtrack.  Conrail was the freight part whereas Amtrack was passenger service and both were miserable failures and essentially a bottomless pit of ever-increasing debt.  The only way that high-speed rail, in the US would survive was if it was private industry that ran it but Democrats (Socialist and/or Communist) don't want that but would necessitate government control.  

Another roadblock to high-speed rail is for any to succeed it would have to have rail without any road crossings and that would mean huge expenditures to purchase right of way and taking of land where people were unwilling to sell or sell for the price the government would want to pay.  Private rail would never be enticed for they know that it would never be a profitable venture for them and their money is in the freight portion of the rail industry.  High-Speed rail might be feasible between certain cities and routes but again only if such could be established without any road crossings or interactions with road traffic.

Another portion of the article stated the following

"Climate activists have tried rallying Democrats to the concept of a Green New Deal to decarbonize the U.S. economy while also broadly expanding the government’s role in improving the economy and bolstering the social safety net. The plan calls for a 10-year “national mobilization” requiring new electrical and power grids, retrofitting “all existing buildings” in the United States and high-speed rail and public transit."

The plan requiring new electrical grids again would require government intervention and taking over the total electrical grid rather than a capitalistic system because as it is private industry is already in the process of modernization of their power grids to meet loads but they are vastly limited in their progress because their revenues aren't to the point that makes it reasonable or economically feasible.  What the government would want in order to meet the new Green Deal would be to make it much more efficient and eliminate loss in lines something that would cost an extreme amount for any utility not to mention the need to meet increased demand that would be needed and that would have to come from Nuclear if all fossil fuel methods were eliminated.  

Another fact would be the need to either rebuild or retrofit all existing buildings to meet newly proposed requirements to meet their demands for a green building and these three things, rail, power, and buildings would call for exponential increases in government spending as well as exponential spending by private industry and individuals.  Spending that could not be done and realize any sense of a profit.  Likewise to pay for such government would have to greatly increase taxes to the public and the public that pays the most taxes would never go for that much of an increase as would be needed.  Also not included in the cost would be the funds necessary to pay those "UNWILLING" to work.  Not that can't work but those that are unwilling to work. Now let us add to that countless numbers of illegals that certainly would be coming over the border in order to take advantage of the "free" guaranteed money offered to all citizens since they plan to make all these people coming over the border voting citizens.  

The real danger of this "pie in the sky" green plan is that so many Democrats are falling over themselves to attach their names to it.  There is no longer any pretense about changing the United States fundamentally toward being more a Socialist nation than a capitalistic one.  Likewise, the number of people willing to accept anything and everything coming from the Democrats without question is dangerous and very likely would lead to them achieving power but once that happened with the promises of free to all benefits, and the reality of none of them coming to fruition  would lead to mass riots in the streets from all these people looking for income for doing nothing and being unwilling to work.  Who would have thought such would even be tolerated being submitted as a plan by any serious party seeking to rule.  

This is what led to the murder of countless millions of people when they were promised the world, in the Soviet Union, only to realize that all the promises were empty and broken.  Their riots were met with governmental oppression and total governmental control.  This is what an unchecked College system that preaches socialism and communism as meet all solutions and unquestioning students willing to accept what they are told without question or debate.  Lack of teaching the fundamentals of what made our nation great and how we have become the greatest nation on earth with a much greater standard of living that has never been matched or exceeded by any nation.  Another reason why so many want to come to the United States rather than from the United States.

If these people, that love socialism so much, love it so much then why don't they find a nation that meets their desires and dreams?  Maybe because none exist.

 

 

Be as the Bereans ( Acts 17:11 )
Original Post

For some reason, the Left points out Europe as a shining example of rail commuting and freight delivery.  They must not understand the European system.  Take France and Germany as examples of the countries with the most developed rail systems.  Only 10 percent of persons traveling in both nations use rail.  Only about 15 percent of freight travels by rail in both nations.  Add, that the rail freight system is outdated and expensive.   Freight consists must be coupled by hand -- slow, dangerous and expensive.

Wiki shows the  differences in European and US freight hauling methods.

Within the U.S. railroads carry 39.9% of freight by ton-mile, followed by trucks (33.4%), oil pipelines (14.3%), barges (12%) and air (0.3%).[28]

Railways carried 17.1% of EU freight in terms of tonne-km,[29] compared to road transport (76.4%) and inland waterways (6.5%).[30]

Yes, European rail is mostly electric.  However, as I've shown in other posts, electricity by solar and wind are minor, expensive sources in Europe.  For those with some knowledge of rail and electricity.  First, imagine the expense of converting all rail lines to electric, including locomotives.  Imagine where we would get the electricity.  If you know how long electric lines droop in extreme heat, consider the trains traveling thru the Mojave desert.  I drove cross country about 18 months ago.  The long trains, backed up in the Mojave were quite a sight.  

direstraits posted:

I'm perusing Amazon for a high end bartenders guide.  Thought it might make a good going away present as Ocasio-Cortez seeks new employment come December 2020. Who says conservatives have no heart.  

You have to look at who put her in office. She is there forever.

giftedamateur posted:
direstraits posted:

I'm perusing Amazon for a high end bartenders guide.  Thought it might make a good going away present as Ocasio-Cortez seeks new employment come December 2020. Who says conservatives have no heart.  

You have to look at who put her in office. She is there forever.

Not necessarily!

L. Cranston posted:

I don't know... she seems smart enough to keep you Republicans talking about her all day, every day.

I would hope as crazy and dangerous (to democracy) that her and other's ideas are would get constant battering and exposure.   If these people really believe what they are preaching then there is real danger that one day they might get into power or create other converts to their mindless ramblings.  Democrats should also be ones opposing and condemning this kind of crazy ideas and plans because it does not do any good for the Democrats as a whole.  

Do you personally believe her statements and ideas are good?  Are Needed?  I certainly hope not but if so how do you envision any of these things actually being accomplished or paid for?  Do you also think that moves like these would not harm our Nation's economy or be disastrous?  

 

Well, the way I see it, a 'nonbinding agreement' has kept Republicans up in arms since it was introduced. It won't be worth the paper it's written on.  It has served to show one party wishes to address climate change and facts and the other party only wants to whine about Democrats.

Das Kapital was an aspirational blueprint just like the "Green (As in wasted money!) New Deal". The unfunny Marx boy's work led to hundreds of millions of corpses in the 20th Century and I don't doubt that the wasted green raw deal could add a few million more frozen bodies to that count in the 21st Century.

Stanky posted:

Das Kapital was an aspirational blueprint just like the "Green (As in wasted money!) New Deal". The unfunny Marx boy's work led to hundreds of millions of corpses in the 20th Century and I don't doubt that the wasted green raw deal could add a few million more frozen bodies to that count in the 21st Century.

The problem with Marx and Engel's works is they are based on theory.  If, people don't achieve what the theories project. Its, obviously, the peoples' fault, not the theories that are in error. Which stands science on its head.  Remember, Marxism was supposed to be scientific.

Whereas, Adam Smith's An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, is an inquiry as to why nations obtained and grew wealth.  Not an academic study, but a scientific observation of cause and effect. 

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×