Page 8 of 37 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 365

Thread: Financing the Green New Deal

  1. #71
    Buttermilk Man

    Hawkeye10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Olympia Wa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    41,820

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Nap View Post
    I'm thinking too many people watched Ducktales growing up and have this impression that rich people are all like Scrooge McDuck swimming in a pile of gold.
    Maybe watching Marissa Mayer collect $1.4 million a week or $35,000/hr for a 40 hour week plus all the cool bennies which I think included her own jet for failing at Yahoo gives them the idea that things are too easy for the rich.
    My heart breaks for America......The future is going to be so much suck....Because the people mostly never cared enough to get educated.

  2. #72
    Guru Luckyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,799

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    Alas,

    So the issue is easily summed into two binary views; either the individual is free to own the fruit of his labor (in money or material goods) or he is like serf or slave who owns nothing because he is actually owned by "his state Lordship", who may take as much as it likes to satisfy his own grand schemes and wants. In turn, from that difference comes two views of society as a whole; one is that of free individuals living in voluntary production, cooperation and free exchange, the other that of unfree individuals coerced into involuntary production, into forced sacrifice and coerced exchange by "m' lords" (federal, state, and local).

    Be aware, your enchantment with remaking a nation into the latest vision of utopia (or dystopia) through the government "m lord" on the backs of the current generation men and women is nothing new. For example, the theoretical basis of social transformation was most vividly expounded in the Soviet Union (and China) - a "planned" society supposedly organized to sacrifice the well being of the living on behalf of a future for others. Hence, communists saw immense wisdom in the forced industrialization of Russia is the name of "we". And in the US, the liberals also fell in love with the Soviet sociality utopia building romance, effusing that "The industrialization is directed like a march through conquered territory . . . . The collectivization is like installing an army in a conquered land, according to the worst rigours of war." (Heady stuff, no?)

    Some even declared that that the day of the individual was dead, hence why concern your self with the number of "individuals" sacrificed for the greater good of "the future"?

    And we all know how that turned out: Millions dead, but not before being "mobilized" to forced labor labor camps to clear harbors, cut canals, lay rails, and mine. Millions of others shipped to cities to "produce" without housing or tools, food and clothing severely rationed, and internal passports issued to forcefully tie labor to the land and place. Ah, but what glory was found in undernourished workers driven to death, living in verminous barracks in barbed wire bound camps while utopianists touted the blueprints of a splendor-to-be from their glorious 5 year plans.

    So yes, I see the romance of mobilizing millions to sacrifice for your vision, to live under the illusory idealism of collective sacrifice of body, soul, and immediate future for your "vision". Such is the allure of totalitarian power - to burn vast piles of other people's money, and to sacrifice millions, for schemes and enthusiasms that even you would never buy stock in if it were your money at risk.

    Because, after all, "Green suicide" only feels morally satisfying if all the lemmings are forced to jump off the cliff together, right?
    Extremes are always bad and you are painting a picture of the other extreme. By the same token, if we continue on this path where the rich just get richer and don't even pay their fair share to improve the nation as a whole, the other extreme will happen in which 99% of the population is working for the 1% and they will not be doing it because they were forced by anyone to do but doing it simply to survive economically.

    The middle road is better in which the rich and super rich pay for a higher share that goes to the benefit of the nation, simply because they can. It is called a family and the responsibilities of it where the earners give more economically than the non-earners but the non-earners need to do their jobs in making the family healthier, better fed and better taken care of.

    Utopian dreams, such as the Green Deal, sound great but the reality is that human nature will not allow such Utopian dreams to be reality. Fear and Greed are the make up of every single human being and therefore will "always" interfere with any lofty plans that offer sacrifice for all.

    What needs to happen is for our Congress and the President to compromise in a way that no one gets all they want but also everyone gets some of what they want. This is always hard to do but given that everyone gets something, it is the most possible course of action.

    The one thing that does need to happen is for the extremes to stop. I can't believe that anyone can truly complain about the rich getting richer than anything they can spend on a lifetime and the lifetime of their family and not be willing to give more. This is certainly an extreme that even the super rich can agree to without bending backward. Once again, let me bring Warren Buffet in on this. Here is a man that is among the super wealthy and he himself gives huge amounts of money to charity and good causes. We could start using his formula and apply it to everyone.
    My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring. Money is important but secondary.

  3. #73
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Flori-duh
    Last Seen
    02-17-19 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,706

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Let's not call it a new green deal, call it the amazingly wonderful republican plan to battle pollution therefore saving the entire universe.

    Let's try to put this 'impossible' idea into perspective. First manned airplane flight in the united states, December of 1903. NASA created in July of 1958. It took civilization hundreds of years to go from sailing ships and whale oil lanterns to motorized transportation and finally flight. We then went from very, very basic flight to the jet age in less than fifty years and we went from the start of nasa in 1958 to a moon landing in eleven years. My point is this, when Kennedy announced we are going to the moon, the united states didn't say, why are we going to spend money for that? We cheered the idea as a country. Granted it was as much a cold war move as it was a technological advancement endeavor. Regardless, we made it work when it seemed impossible.

    All we need is the will to do it. Everything is impossible until it's done.
    When I stop answering you, there's a reason.......repeat, When I stop answering you, there's a reason.

  4. #74
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:19 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,132

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Pretty depressing that this thing is being given even 5 minutes of attention.It's being proposed by a bunch of non- serious virtue signlaers whose disconnect from reality is readily apparent to any normsl, grounded person.

  5. #75
    Professor
    Keridan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,227

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Pls note I am clipping because links make post too long, not to change points.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    Do you think that the U.S. is running at full productive capacity? Does Ford produce as many cars as it is able, or are they limited by demand? If you are talking about the viability of any economic expansion, especially one where the government is going to provide most of the demand, that is the question you should be asking.
    The government can encourage demand, not create it. On top of that, it's a very poor method of encouragement. Mostly it's just "you want this because we tell you to". The market spends all its time mastering this skill and does a far better job.

    Ford does not open 30 new plants and staff them because the demand will magically appear. They may have the capacity, but if no one is buying, they are out of business. If government can only bring demand by the measures mentioned below, it is all on the assumption the economy won't collapse when their money is seized and/or made worthless.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    Over the course of how many years?

    From 1940-42, government spending quadrupled over a two-year period. Again, money isn't the issue. The issue is, does our economy have the productive resources to do these things? Do we have enough engineers, enough energy, enough metal and concrete, enough labor, etc.
    You can say money isn't the issue all you want, that doesn't make it true. You do bring up a fair point that we don't have anywhere near the resources otherwise, too, though.


    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    How much did our interest rates go up the last time our ratings went down? Zero. The Fed controls those interest rates, not the market.

    We have been deficit spending for most of our 200+ years in existence. And in 2008, we "printed money" like crazy.
    I don't want to seem rude here, but please look up the credit ratings I listed. These are not home loans, they are ratings of countries' ability to repay their debt or even make payments.


    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    The government doesn't need to make a profit. What's the ROI on a park?
    Happier citizens, improved tourism, etc. There is a point where that ROI is a big old negative, which is why there isn't a park on every city block.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    And who is being paid not to do labor? What kind of arguments are you inventing here?
    I admit she already pulled back and tried to hide from the "unwilling" to work and she will back off a ton more as its insanity becomes clearer to more people.


    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    First of all, where are you getting your numbers?
    Smart Grid Price Tag: $476 Billion; Benefits: $2 Trillion | Greentech Media

    Decarbonization of industrial sectors: The next frontier | McKinsey

    Commentary: Universal Basic Income May Sound Attractive But, If It Occurred, Would Likelier Increase Poverty Than Reduce It | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

    The Costs of a National Single-Payer Healthcare System | Mercatus Center

    Of course, this is just picking out a few of her "ideas".

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    Second, GDP at the start of WWII was about $100 billion. At the end, it was a bit over $200 billion. But it continued to climb - even though spending money on tanks and planes was hardly what you could call "investment" in the country - it was more akin to building stuff and dumping it into the ocean. GND spending, on the other hand, will show, and it will have lasting positive effects.
    As soon as the war was over, the spending decreased dramatically. This allowed the boost not to fall in on itself. Not to mention the national unity that would never exist as the government burned down around us.

    This is Wash Examiner, but the article itself isn't too partisan. It's worth the read on this imaginary comparison.

    Reality check: Cost of 'Green New Deal' would dwarf moon landing, highway system, and New Deal itself
    Omniscience just sucks without omnipotence!

  6. #76
    Guru
    Sampson Simpson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:38 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,786

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    "how will we pay for this...."

    Did cons think of that when they pushed to invade iraq and the billions and billions of dollars that cost? Or for the stupid, pointless wall they want? Sorry, conservatives can STFU with t his "how can we pay for it" they have proven to not care about spending, so no longer will you be able to pathetically wave your hands and say "how will we pay for it"

    it's time we spend money helping our citizens, and helping actual people, not killing and destroying.

    And can be paid by stop giving people who have all the wealth anyway tax cuts they don't need

  7. #77
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:44 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    39,905

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Sampson Simpson View Post
    "how will we pay for this...."

    Did cons think of that when they pushed to invade iraq and the billions and billions of dollars that cost? Or for the stupid, pointless wall they want? Sorry, conservatives can STFU with t his "how can we pay for it" they have proven to not care about spending, so no longer will you be able to pathetically wave your hands and say "how will we pay for it"

    it's time we spend money helping our citizens, and helping actual people, not killing and destroying.

    And can be paid by stop giving people who have all the wealth anyway tax cuts they don't need
    yet this doesn't help anyone costs millions of jobs and puts everyone except the rich elitists in the poor house.
    i can't afford all her free stuff.

  8. #78
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:19 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,132

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Sampson Simpson View Post
    "how will we pay for this...."

    Did cons think of that when they pushed to invade iraq and the billions and billions of dollars that cost? Or for the stupid, pointless wall they want? Sorry, conservatives can STFU with t his "how can we pay for it" they have proven to not care about spending, so no longer will you be able to pathetically wave your hands and say "how will we pay for it"

    it's time we spend money helping our citizens, and helping actual people, not killing and destroying.

    And can be paid by stop giving people who have all the wealth anyway tax cuts they don't need
    We paid for Iraq through taxes. Since by 2006 we were almost at a budget break even point, it was prudent not to raise taxes .

    The wal cost a fraction of a fraction of this stupid Green deal would cost ( and lets' not forget - on TOP of the staggering cost of health care the Dems want)

    So your argument gets slapped back in your face. It's comical for *Dems* to shed crocodile tears because the the wall would cost too much.

    #SLAP

  9. #79
    Student manofknowledge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    02-14-19 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    279

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by KLATTU View Post
    We paid for Iraq through taxes. Since by 2006 we were almost at a budget break even point, it was prudent not to raise taxes .

    The wal cost a fraction of a fraction of this stupid Green deal would cost ( and lets' not forget - on TOP of the staggering cost of health care the Dems want)

    So your argument gets slapped back in your face. It's comical for *Dems* to shed crocodile tears because the the wall would cost too much.

    #SLAP
    First we paid for the Iraq war through deficit spending not taxes. In fact taxes were cut at the around same time the war was engaged. Bush tax cuts were in 2001 and 2003. There was never a request for the taxpayers to support the war. It would have made it a non-starter politically.

    The US already spends $3.5 trilllion dollars a year on health care and that cost rises faster than inflation while leaving a significant percentage of the population without access to comprehensive care. Roughly half of that cost is already paid by taxpayers. Do you advocate for the current system of health care? Do you propose there is no way to improve upon it? What is your plan for health care? Why should taxpayers insure the elderly and the young but not the workers? Why should employers bear the burden of health insurance for their employees? Do you favor rationing of health care by wealth?

    No intelligent arguments against the wall are based on it's cost alone. The point is whether it is worth the investment. Are there better ways to manage immigration? Should we allow a President to shut down the government to get his way?

  10. #80
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:44 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,056

    Re: Financing the Green New Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnfrmClevelan View Post
    Don't make the mistake of judging everything in terms of dollars. That was the whole point of bringing up our WWII mobilization - unheard of amounts of money were created to create unheard of amounts of production.
    Yeah Obama borrowed 10 trillion in just 8 yrs doubling our national debt and we got in exchange the worst economic recovery in US History.

    The money part was easy, because the government just prints it up. It's the production that's the hard part. It's also the limiting part.
    Yeah just print it up. Under your concept Obama should have printed up 10 trillion and not borrow it and now into perpetuity we have to pay interest on that 10 trillion.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

Page 8 of 37 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •