You should see him try to talk about sports.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crovash
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
You should see him try to talk about sports.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crovash
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is though because the plan in and of itself is not pure socialism even if it leans further left. Some ideas withing it are definitely closer to socialism than where we are today but that is different than the plan itself being socialism. Calling it socialism is like I said just how people who are playing those games like Trump react to ideas from "the other side.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
I mean the name of it being an issue just seems lol worthy. Who cares what they call it whether it is "green" or "new deal" aspect you focus on it won't change what is within.
I agree some ideas within might be unreasonable but this is much better than having absolutely 0 plan or ever bringing up ideas around the issues that so many people seem on board with. If there are better options then go ahead and tell people what they are instead of this BS. As stated this is the only plan that seems to even want to touch the issues even if it might not fully work itself/reaches too far. This has done nothing to address the issues within or give reasonable alternatives.
We already have a plan and it's working. Renewable energy is on the rise in the US and will continue that trend. You think she's the first person in the country to call for such a thing? The idea that we should blindly support her because no one else is thinking about this stuff is preposterous.Quote:
Originally Posted by mngopher35
She wants to be completely renewable in 10 years. That means we won't be using engines in a mere 10 years. Does that seem at all plausible to you or anyone else? And of course she brings no creativity to the table. Just a bunch of "goals" and policy buzzwords.
SpecialFNK
How would you rate AOC on looks on a scale from 1-10?
You think our current government has an effective plan to cover all those issues currently? I would definitely disagree but am open to hearing you explain that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
I am not saying she is the first person to call for this nor am I saying we should blindly support her, care to back up these claims? I am simply calling out people who want to attack her without context, scream socialism to fear monger, and ignore that there are positives to go along with the negatives. In fact I have multiple times said I have issues myself with her in full just that ignoring the context around her makes those bashing her just to bash without any real substance foolish. I do think this has been one of the more talked about policy relating to many of these issues due to her/this plan though which is nice to put it more into the spotlight. Would also be open to you sharing who else has done this to such an extent?
Wow here we go you got into a subject that I agree with and think goes too far/isn't realistic to be completed. I have a question though, if possible over time with advancements in technology to the point we have an option of completely renewable energy or sticking with the same old what would you choose? If the answer is that this is a good goal just not feasible in todays standards the discussion should probably be about todays standards/how do we get close instead of simply bashing... Unless the goal was never to discuss the issues/policy but instead to attack sides, scream socialism, ignore context etc.
Yea, we have engineers and scientists currently working on this issue and they rough estimate made by people who actually know what they're talking about say something more like 2050.Quote:
Originally Posted by mngopher35
AOC came in and said she'd do it in 10 years and give you a house. :laugh:
I agree we do have engineers and scientists saying a ton of things about climate change but my point was that politicians/our government seem to not react to that often times. There have been tons of environmental thread with policy that engineers and scientists might disagree with for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
AOC has bold plans she probably can't accomplish but are what scientists/engineers say should be our goal (just reached at a later time)? Again this is better than ignoring the problem or scientists/engineers in a general sense when they say things. Worst case with her approach is we fail and wait till 2050 to implement. Worst case with ignoring scientists/engineers is far more concerning.
No she definitely can't accomplish it. She can try and **** things up in the process like most government officials, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by mngopher35
It is better than commenting on the weather being cold and pretending like the problem doesn't exist though lolQuote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
Again it isn't a perfect plan it is just better than a lot of the rhetoric from politicians/government figures we have seen and you have done very little to counter that or respond to actual points being made. Not accomplishing something but working towards good goals isn't necessarily ****ing things up but I would argue ignoring reality like the above definitely is.
Again you continue to imply that everyone else is just sitting around with their thumbs up their butts. How is it possible that our usage of renewable energy continues to rise year after year? I guess she must be working on it secretly already.Quote:
Originally Posted by mngopher35
All I have done is asked for you to provide evidence that all those issues are largely being covered in a meaningful way and you have refused. I have asked to give examples of the other plans/politicians creating this publicity/discussion and pushing for the same issues so many want in similar ways in government.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...ther-Coal-Rule
https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...oxic-Pollution
https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...irnoment/page9
https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...er-Protections
There are plenty of threads on issues related to the environment but we have seen nothing like the response to this in any of them tbh. In fact they kinda seem to go against what scientists might suggest. I can actually link the tweets or Trump making comments related to climate change too if wanted.
All I am doing is pointing out the reality of politics/environmental issues and how they have been handled/discussed by this administration, politicians in general, posters on this site and so on. I have openly asked for examples but you refuse to give any. She is pushing for changes that are needed/have been ignored too much within this little game and while she might be a bit off on her wants at the very least is bringing the issues front and center to be discussed instead of all the BS rhetoric/policies we have seen over the years on the issue in politics to ignore the problem for the most part/imply we have it covered already.
(https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/) study by IPCC about future dangers and how quick we need to act
I said it days ago - the government ain't solving the problem. Your rationale seems to be that even though her plan sucks we still need to value it because at least she's doing something! Nonsense, she's one of thousands and thousands of politicians to talk about energy.
I am saying that the plan as a whole has plenty of good mixed in with some of the bad and playing these all in game of amazing/sucks are ridiculous and the same old game.Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbang
Sure one of thousands to talk about it but how many have actually come up with plans that hit the public like this sparking discussion etc. to anywhere near this extent? Again it is really easy to tweet about weather and pretend it isn't happening and so on but that isn't actually addressing the problem and actually hurting despite a politician talking about it lol.
When you have brought up a specific issue I mostly agreed with you on it I just think that pushing for something good that might not be feasible in X time frame can still benefit us in the end if it happens a few years later than X. I don't think bashing everything within is a good idea just because you dislike AOC or dislike some parts when again this policy is so much different than anything else in response to this problem, something you have continually been unable to counter. The government could potentially help solve the problem if they actually took steps to try instead of ignoring and denying the issue though lol. This isn't an all in good or all in bad this team rocks this team sucks type thing lol. It can be a mix of good/bad that is worth discussing as a whole.
Going 100% renewable is hardly a new talking point. The reason why she "sparked" so much discussion is because she's a raging socialist and crafted a pipe dream plan that's moves the US significantly more towards socialism. It's parody.Quote:
Originally Posted by mngopher35
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...green-new-deal
like along with all the specific things from that earlier article this covers general support. It has 80% support and in a time of partisanship/divisiveness even has 64% support from republicans (although they did not mention who supported it which may have played into that).... From Article
More than 80 percent of registered voters support the Green New Deal proposal being pushed by progressional Democratic lawmakers, a new poll found.
The survey conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication found that 92 percent of Democrats and 64 percent of Republicans back the Green New Deal plan.
The organizations behind the poll explained poll-takers avoided mentioning to respondents which representatives were backing the New Green Deal to prevent injecting bias.
Progressive Democrats like Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) and Rep. John Lewis (Ga.) are some of the loudest voices behind the idea, which has been backed by only Democratic lawmakers back so far.
“Other research has shown that people evaluate policies more negatively when they are told it is backed by politicians from an opposing political party. Conversely, people evaluate the same policy more positively when told it is backed by politicians from their own party,” the poll takers wrote in a blog post explaining its results.
“Therefore, these findings may indicate that although most Republicans and conservatives are in favor of the Green New Deal’s policies in principle, they are not yet aware that this plan is proposed by the political Left.”
Again I am not saying it is perfect or even that 80% means I am right you are wrong it isn't about that. Again I do agree with some of your criticism it is just that as a whole there is plenty to like (even for both sides). It just isn't really crazy to think there is plenty of good here either and you seem to ignore most of the points I make in favor just to try and bash as a whole. It is complex with a lot of issues but as a whole it would seem a lot of people see value, even on both sides it's a majority. Lets try and dissect that instead of this left socialism bad rhetoric we always see.