Just When you Thought Democrats Could not get any more STUPID

[Catholic Crusader]

• Rebuild every single building in America
• Phase out air travel in 10 years
• Government jobs and health care for everybody
• If we don’t have the money for it, no big deal, just print some

Sound Crazy? Yes! It is also the Green New Deal that the Democrat presidential hopefuls signed onto. Yes, Liberals and Democrats are actually that stupid.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Mandatory Train Travel And Regulated COW FARTS: The 'Green New Deal' Is Even Crazier Than You Thought

You have to read this:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43181/mandatory-train-travel-and-regulated-cow-farts-emily-zanotti

 

[DarkAsylum]

:doh::kookoo:

 

[ok doser]

• Rebuild every single building in America
• Phase out air travel in 10 years
• Government jobs and health care for everybody
• If we don’t have the money for it, no big deal, just print some

Sound Crazy? Yes! It is also the Green New Deal that the Democrat presidential hopefuls signed onto. Yes, Liberals and Democrats are actually that stupid.

ya know, a little green hair and we got a real joker vibe going there

 

[WizardofOz]

Here is the text of the resolution

I am not fan of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez's economics but perhaps [MENTION=15148]CatholicCrusader[/MENTION] or someone who has actually read this can point out where she recommends rebuilding every single building in America, phasing out air travel in 10 years and government jobs for everybody.

That would be great :juggle:

I've also read claims that this resolution proposes eliminated nuclear energy. I don't see that after a cursory search either. :idunno:

Maybe people should read what is says instead of listening to pundits telling you what it says. This is akin to Pelosi's 'we have to pass the bill before we can find out what's in it'.

Partisan buffoons on all sides of the isle these days.

 

[ok doser]

I've also read claims that this resolution proposes eliminated nuclear energy. I don't see that after a cursory search either. :idunno:

7 (iii) by reducing the risks posed by cli-1mate impacts; and 2(iv) by ensuring that any infrastruc-3ture bill considered by Congress addresses 4climate change; 5(C) meeting 100 percent of the power de-6mand in the United States through clean, re-7newable, and zero-emission energy sources,

do you suppose they consider nukes to be "clean" and "renewable"?

 

[WizardofOz]

7 (iii) by reducing the risks posed by cli-1mate impacts; and 2(iv) by ensuring that any infrastruc-3ture bill considered by Congress addresses 4climate change; 5(C) meeting 100 percent of the power de-6mand in the United States through clean, re-7newable, and zero-emission energy sources,

do you suppose they consider nukes to be "clean" and "renewable"?

"In fact, nuclear protects our air quality as a form of zero-emission clean energy. That's because nuclear fission generates electricity without the harmful byproducts that coal, oil and natural gas emit." Here

The word "nuclear" never once appears in the entire document. Nuclear is about as clean as it gets.

Is Nuclear Energy Renewable Energy? Most supporters of nuclear energy point out the low carbon emission aspect of nuclear energy as its major characteristic to be defined as renewable energy. According to nuclear power opponents, if the goal to build a renewable energy infrastructure is to lower carbon emission then there is no reason for not including nuclear energy in that list. [1] But one of the most interesting arguments for including nuclear energy in the renewable energy portfolio came from Bernard L Cohen, former professor at University of Pittsburg. Professor Cohen defined the term 'indefinite'(time span required for an energy source to be sustainable enough to be called renewable energy) in numbers by using the expected relationship between the sun (source of solar energy) and the earth. According to Professor Cohen, if the Uranium deposit could be proved to last as long as the relationship between the Earth and Sun is supposed to last (5 billion years) then nuclear energy should be included in the renewable energy portfolio. [2] In his paper Professor Cohen claims that using breeder reactors (nuclear reactor able to generate more fissile material than it consumes) it is possible to fuel the earth with nuclear energy indefinitely. Although the amount of uranium deposit available could only supply nuclear energy for about 1000 years, Professor Cohen believes actual amount of uranium deposit available is way more than what is considered extractable right now. In his arguments he includes uranium that could be extracted at a higher cost, uranium from the sea water and also uranium from eroding earth crust by river water. All of those possible uranium resources if used in a breeder reactor would be enough to fuel the earth for another 5 billion years and hence renders nuclear energy as renewable energy. Here

So either Ocasio-Cortez is confused about the merits of nuclear energy or she's being misrepresented by her detractors or both.

"Nuclear energy is by far the largest source of clean-air energy in the United States, generating more than 56 percent of the nation's emission-free electricity."

 

[WizardofOz]

[MENTION=17501]ok doser[/MENTION] - get an avatar already

This is for posters with less than 23k posts :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

"In fact, nuclear protects our air quality as a form of zero-emission clean energy. That's because nuclear fission generates electricity without the harmful byproducts that coal, oil and natural gas emit." Here

The word "nuclear" never once appears in the entire document. Nuclear is about as clean as it gets.

Is Nuclear Energy Renewable Energy? Most supporters of nuclear energy point out the low carbon emission aspect of nuclear energy as its major characteristic to be defined as renewable energy. According to nuclear power opponents, if the goal to build a renewable energy infrastructure is to lower carbon emission then there is no reason for not including nuclear energy in that list. [1] But one of the most interesting arguments for including nuclear energy in the renewable energy portfolio came from Bernard L Cohen, former professor at University of Pittsburg. Professor Cohen defined the term 'indefinite'(time span required for an energy source to be sustainable enough to be called renewable energy) in numbers by using the expected relationship between the sun (source of solar energy) and the earth. According to Professor Cohen, if the Uranium deposit could be proved to last as long as the relationship between the Earth and Sun is supposed to last (5 billion years) then nuclear energy should be included in the renewable energy portfolio. [2] In his paper Professor Cohen claims that using breeder reactors (nuclear reactor able to generate more fissile material than it consumes) it is possible to fuel the earth with nuclear energy indefinitely. Although the amount of uranium deposit available could only supply nuclear energy for about 1000 years, Professor Cohen believes actual amount of uranium deposit available is way more than what is considered extractable right now. In his arguments he includes uranium that could be extracted at a higher cost, uranium from the sea water and also uranium from eroding earth crust by river water. All of those possible uranium resources if used in a breeder reactor would be enough to fuel the earth for another 5 billion years and hence renders nuclear energy as renewable energy. Here

So either Ocasio-Cortez is confused about the merits of nuclear energy or she's being misrepresented by her detractors or both.

"Nuclear energy is by far the largest source of clean-air energy in the United States, generating more than 56 percent of the nation's emission-free electricity."

i agree, but the left has traditionally been opposed to nuke plants

i'd be thrilled to see that they recognize their utility


you know what's happening in germany, right?

 

[WizardofOz]

i agree, but the left has traditionally been opposed to nuke plants

i'd be thrilled to see that they recognize their utility

:thumb: Absolutely
I mean I am certainly skeptical of Ocasio-Cortez having more understanding than Jane Doe but if anyone is really serious about environmental issues and clean energy, nuclear is the way to go along with the support of wind and solar.

you know what's happening in germany, right?

You referring to them phasing out nuclear? If so, yeah. It's backwards and nothing more than reactionary.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

I am not fan of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez's economics but perhaps [MENTION=15148]CatholicCrusader[/MENTION] or someone who has actually read this can point out where she recommends rebuilding every single building in America, phasing out air travel in 10 years and government jobs for everybody.......

Seriously? Every news station is talking about the contents, and you need someone to spell it out for you? Do it yourself. I'm not your welfare provider. You want something, get it for yourself.

 

[WizardofOz]

Seriously? Every news station is talking about the contents, and you need someone to spell it out for you? Do it yourself. I'm not your welfare provider. You want something, get it for yourself.

You're just showing that you're a lazy follower. Rather than read and disseminate the information yourself you just believe what you're told like a naive child. :sheep:

 

[Catholic Crusader]

The 10 Most Insane Requirements Of The Green New Deal
https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/07/ten-most-insane-requirements-green-new-deal/

1. Ban affordable energy. GND calls for the elimination of all fossil fuel energy production, the lifeblood of American industry and life, which includes not only all oil but also natural gas — one of the cheapest sources of American energy, and one of the reasons the United States has been able to lead the world in carbon-emissions reduction.
2. Eliminate nuclear energy. The GND also calls for eliminating all nuclear power, one of the only productive and somewhat affordable “clean” energy sources available to us, in 11 years. This move would purge around 20 percent of American energy generation so you can rely on intermittent wind for your energy needs.
3. Eliminate 99 percent of cars. To be fair, under the GND, everyone will need to retrofit their cars with Flintstones-style foot holes or pedals for cycling. The authors state that the GND would like to replace every “combustion-engine vehicle” — trucks, airplanes, boats, and 99 percent of cars — within ten years. Charging stations for electric vehicles will be built “everywhere,” though how power plants will provide the energy needed to charge them is a mystery.
4. Gut and rebuild every building in America. Markey and Cortez want to “retrofit every building in America” with “state of the art energy efficiency.” I repeat, “every building in America.” That includes every home, factory, and apartment building, which will all need, for starters, to have their entire working heating and cooling systems ripped out and replaced with…well, with whatever technology Democrats are going invent in their committee hearings, I guess.
5. Eliminate air travel. GND calls for building out “highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.” Good luck Hawaii! California’s high-speed boondoggle is already in $100 billion dollars of debt, and looks to be one of the state’s biggest fiscal disasters ever. Amtrak runs billions of dollars in the red (though, as we’ll see, trains that run on fossil fuels will also be phased out). Imagine growing that business model out to every state in America?
6. A government-guaranteed job. The bill promises the United States government will provide every single American with a job that includes a “family-sustaining wage, family and medical leave, vacations, and a pension.” You can imagine that those left in the private sector would be funding these through some unspecified “massive” taxation. On the bright side, when you’re foraging for food, your savings will be worthless.
7. Free education for life. GND promises free college or trade schools for every American.
8. A salubrious diet. The GND promises the government will provide “healthy food” to every American (because there are no beans or lettuce in your local supermarket, I guess).
9. A house. The GND promises that the government will provide, “safe, affordable, adequate housing” for every American citizen. I call dibs on an affordable Adams Morgan townhouse. Thank you, Ocasio-Cortez.
10. Free money. The GND aims to provide, and I am not making this up, “economic security” for all who are “unable or unwilling” to work. Just to reiterate: if you’re unwilling to work, the rest of us will have your back.
11. Bonus insanity: Ban meat. Ocasio-Cortez admits that we can’t get zero emissions in 10 years “because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.” The only way to get rid of farting cows is to get rid of beef.

(ME: Yes, I know, its eleven, not ten)

 

[WizardofOz]

[*]Free money. The GND aims to provide, and I am not making this up, “economic security” for all who are “unable or unwilling” to work. Just to reiterate: if you’re unwilling to work, the rest of us will have your back.

You are making that up. You put quotes around "unable or unwilling". Show me where it says that

I'm in no way defending this plan but you're making a fool of yourself by repeating 'fake news' and show you have to lie in order to defeat a first-time nobody representative.

 

[ok doser]

[*]Free money. The GND aims to provide, and I am not making this up, “economic security” for all who are “unable or unwilling” to work. Just to reiterate: if you’re unwilling to work, the rest of us will have your back.

are they promoting a guaranteed minimum income?

Bonus insanity: Ban meat.

they can take my bacon when they can pry it from my cold dead greasy fingers :sibbie:

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Here is the text of the resolution

I am not fan of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez's economics but perhaps @CatholicCrusader or someone who has actually read this can point out where she recommends rebuilding every single building in America, phasing out air travel in 10 years and government jobs for everybody.

That would be great :juggle:

I've also read claims that this resolution proposes eliminated nuclear energy. I don't see that after a cursory search either. :idunno:

Maybe people should read what is says instead of listening to pundits telling you what it says. This is akin to Pelosi's 'we have to pass the bill before we can find out what's in it'.

Partisan buffoons on all sides of the isle these days.

So I read the actual legislation and this is the only thing I found that would fit the list provided:

(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification;

The rest of the claims made in the thread so far seems to be massive and largely unjustified interpretations.

 

[ok doser]

So I read the actual legislation and this is the only thing I found that would fit the list provided:

(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification;

The rest of the claims made in the thread so far seems to be massive and largely unjustified interpretations.

would it be a massive and largely unjustified interpretation to assume they plan to rely heavily on wind and solar?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

would it be a massive and largely unjustified interpretation to assume they plan to rely heavily on wind and solar?

Not really. Though I agree with Wizard of Oz's views on Nuclear power as a clean energy source.

 

[jgarden]

• Rebuild every single building in America
• Phase out air travel in 10 years
• Government jobs and health care for everybody
• If we don’t have the money for it, no big deal, just print some

Sound Crazy? Yes! It is also the Green New Deal that the Democrat presidential hopefuls signed onto. Yes, Liberals and Democrats are actually that stupid.

The next "outrage" those crazy "Liberals and Democrats" might contemplate is the "stupid" idea of rewarding the nation's wealthiest individuals with a $1 trillion "tax cut" - despite having a prosperous economy and resorting to the use of "borrowed money!"

OOPS - that's already been done!

 

[Aimiel]

The very idea of even considering the 'green new deal' is sheer folly.