Kind of surprised no one started a thread about the New Green Deal. Of course lots of back and forth on it, and there was DiFi's old lady dismissal of middle schoolers lobbying for the future.

Pretty telling that 12 y.o. kids are taking up the mantle and fighting for the future, their future. Not only the kids who confronted DiFi but 20 kids took the day off and confronted Mitch the Turtle Boy senator.

Media is following this one and will for a while. Lots of comments about how the U.S. can't afford and it's a goofy idea that can't possibly work. And yet there's the UN report that the world has about 12 years to address man made climate change...or it's OVER.

Best I've read went something like this, "If you think the GND people are kooky, at least they're working with science and aren't totally off their rocker like climate deniers". This puts the conversation in perspective, and the fight.

The funny thing is there's even Dems who are saying it's too costly (like irreversible climate change will be cheaper) and not practical...the public is getting down on them. Seems most people want something done about climate and yet these pols are dragging their feet.

Comments on the GND, feasibility, reality, costs? Or is addressing climate change and the economy too much work and hassle...so just screw it?

dajo9 said:

---

UIKeyInputRightArrowThis will be a long process. First, the people who propose something seem like outliers and their proposals will get attacked, particularly the most aggressive proposals. These people will be mocked. Then there will be some cleanup and the better ideas will come to the fore. These will be defeated. Nothing will happen. Then, eventually, after things get really bad, legislation will pass in a hurry.

We are currently in stage 2 of the outline described below, after over a decade of being in stage 1:

"First they ignore you,
then they ridicule you,
then they fight you,
and then you win"
Gandhi

---

Gandhi once again is spot on.

Interesting stuff about Gandhi and India's independence. There's an analogy that Gandhi and India were like an elephant stomping a mouse. To the point, when you have numbers like that, you can grind the opposition to a pulp slowly and that's what he lead.

Of course much of the noise is coming from within the Democratic party and many are calling this divide a generational divide, as we see with DiFi, Pelosi and others vs. AOC and 12 y.o. kids.

On that note, Difi infamously said it would take more than 10 years when talking to those kids...and in all likelihood she's be dead and gone. This reinforces the generational divide theory. It amazes me that she doesn't sense the urgency but perhaps that's the outcome of the deniers slog in the U.S.

In any case, I think the new generation is really into smashing the wait and grind mentality. It'll be interesting if they can goat the dinosaurs. Seems to be the majority of the country want action on climate.

The other thing that amazes me is the talk about costs. No doubt it will cost real $$$. However if you do nothing, it will cost more, way more in the long turn. As always, either pay up front or pay later at a much, much higher cost and with less likelihood of containment.

From Wikipedia:

New Deal improvisation as a model

Although the non-specific nature of current GND proposals has become a concern for some Greens,[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal#cite_note-105][105][/url] one writer from the Columbia University Earth Institute views the lack of specificity as a strength, noting that: "FDR's New Deal was a series of improvisations in response to specific problems that were stalling economic development. There was no master plan, many ideas failed, and some were ended after a period of experimentation. But some, like social security and the Security and Exchange Commission's regulation of the stock market, became permanent American institutions."[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal#cite_note-106][106][/url]


There is a lot in that paragraph. It's a mixed bag...about "improvisation".
The has been an emergence of applied improvisation in the last, say, 15 years in fields from business practices to helping people with dementia. Some would say the Orange Man improvises. Not even close...
he's all about the current transaction with little to no knowledge of the past or caring about
what the future will be.

I'm actually being serious. But, to take it to the limit (great Eagles' song) imagine The Turtle
and Tucker Carlson.....doing silly walks on the Mall. No chance that's going to happen.
But does convincing them that say, climate change, is real doesn't have a much greater chance.
This going to be a long process as dajo9 says.....

sycasey said:

---

They're moving the Overton Window on climate-change discussion. Not everything in the proposal will actually happen. The point is to get it on the table.

---

Yep

Thread:

Another Bear said:

---

Kind of surprised no one started a thread about the New Green Deal. Of course lots of back and forth on it, and there was DiFi's old lady dismissal of middle schoolers lobbying for the future.

Pretty telling that 12 y.o. kids are taking up the mantle and fighting for the future, their future. Not only the kids who confronted DiFi but 20 kids took the day off and confronted Mitch the Turtle Boy senator.

Media is following this one and will for a while. Lots of comments about how the U.S. can't afford and it's a goofy idea that can't possibly work. And yet there's the UN report that the world has about 12 years to address man made climate change...or it's OVER.

Best I've read went something like this, "If you think the GND people are kooky, at least they're working with science and aren't totally off their rocker like climate deniers". This puts the conversation in perspective, and the fight.

The funny thing is there's even Dems who are saying it's too costly (like irreversible climate change will be cheaper) and not practical...the public is getting down on them. Seems most people want something done about climate and yet these pols are dragging their feet.

Comments on the GND, feasibility, reality, costs? Or is addressing climate change and the economy too much work and hassle...so just screw it?

---

Many aspects of the Green New Deal are unrealistic, pie in the sky things. But at least it starts the conversation and the end result, much like Obamacare, doesn't necessarily resemble the stuff that was proposed in the beginning. Left to their own devices, the moderate Democrats will join the GOP in doing nothing, so it's good that somebody is applying the pressure.

Again, something that could have started in the Obama administration when there was a Democratic majority in both houses, but it was just a talking point on the campaign that he didn't follow through on.

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

Quote:

---

Many aspects of the Green New Deal are unrealistic, pie in the sky things. But at least it starts the conversation and the end result, much like Obamacare, doesn't necessarily resemble the stuff that was proposed in the beginning. Left to their own devices, the moderate Democrats will join the GOP in doing nothing, so it's good that somebody is applying the pressure.

Again, something that could have started in the Obama administration when there was a Democratic majority in both houses, but it was just a talking point on the campaign that he didn't follow through on.

---

To be fair with Obama, the first 4 years he had a very full plate with a Great Recession teetering on depression, a banking crisis and two unwinnable wars (still going on). I think the logic then was fix the economy and doing something about global warming (like tax and trade carbon) was too much...and yes, he rolled over a little quickly but he got things righted, like a responsible leader.

Otherwise I agree, there is stuff that's unrealistic in the NGD but that's to be expected since it's a platform/goal document, not full policy, which would have to be hashed out in negotiations, congressional committees, the CBO, research, etc.

The big thing is, the GND was introduced and got the dialog started in a big way (look at the right attacks on AOC). I believe the majority of American do want action. Pressure is definitely on...and it's not going away.

AOC is on top of things and she's not backing down. She's calling the fence sitters like DiFi, Climate Delayers. I believe this is what leadership looks like, and it's about freakin' time.

The GND, not going away. DiFi stepped in it...big time.

Big props to the youth taking responsibility when the *********adults can not. Really happy to see these kids stand up.

Anarchistbear said:

---

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

---

Agreed. I can even see many Dems voting against it if their votes mattered (control of Congress and President), because of vested interests back in their district. I could actually see this backfiring against the Dems with certain constituencies. We really don't have a best for the world mindset in this country, more like an anti-globalization movement.

Anarchistbear said:

---

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

---

Of course not. The goal is to make the next political climate more hospitable.

Another Bear said:

---

Kind of surprised no one started a thread about the New Green Deal. Of course lots of back and forth on it, and there was DiFi's old lady dismissal of middle schoolers lobbying for the future.

Pretty telling that 12 y.o. kids are taking up the mantle and fighting for the future, their future. Not only the kids who confronted DiFi but 20 kids took the day off and confronted Mitch the Turtle Boy senator.

Media is following this one and will for a while. Lots of comments about how the U.S. can't afford and it's a goofy idea that can't possibly work. And yet there's the UN report that the world has about 12 years to address man made climate change...or it's OVER.

Best I've read went something like this, "If you think the GND people are kooky, at least they're working with science and aren't totally off their rocker like climate deniers". This puts the conversation in perspective, and the fight.

The funny thing is there's even Dems who are saying it's too costly (like irreversible climate change will be cheaper) and not practical...the public is getting down on them. Seems most people want something done about climate and yet these pols are dragging their feet.

Comments on the GND, feasibility, reality, costs? Or is addressing climate change and the economy too much work and hassle...so just screw it?

---

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-2-24-the-greatest-scientific-fraud-of-all-time-part-xxi

kelly09 said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Kind of surprised no one started a thread about the New Green Deal. Of course lots of back and forth on it, and there was DiFi's old lady dismissal of middle schoolers lobbying for the future.

Pretty telling that 12 y.o. kids are taking up the mantle and fighting for the future, their future. Not only the kids who confronted DiFi but 20 kids took the day off and confronted Mitch the Turtle Boy senator.

Media is following this one and will for a while. Lots of comments about how the U.S. can't afford and it's a goofy idea that can't possibly work. And yet there's the UN report that the world has about 12 years to address man made climate change...or it's OVER.

Best I've read went something like this, "If you think the GND people are kooky, at least they're working with science and aren't totally off their rocker like climate deniers". This puts the conversation in perspective, and the fight.

The funny thing is there's even Dems who are saying it's too costly (like irreversible climate change will be cheaper) and not practical...the public is getting down on them. Seems most people want something done about climate and yet these pols are dragging their feet.

Comments on the GND, feasibility, reality, costs? Or is addressing climate change and the economy too much work and hassle...so just screw it?

---

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-2-24-the-greatest-scientific-fraud-of-all-time-part-xxi

---

About that...

Quote:

---

OSLO (Reuters) - Evidence for man-made global warming has reached a "gold standard" level of certainty, adding pressure for cuts in greenhouse gases to limit rising temperatures, scientists said on Monday.

"Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals," the U.S.-led team wrote in the journal Nature Climate Change of satellite measurements of rising temperatures over the past 40 years.

They said confidence that human activities were raising the heat at the Earth's surface had reached a "five-sigma" level, a statistical gauge meaning there is only a one-in-a-million chance that the signal would appear if there was no warming.

---

The good news is here though:

Quote:

---

Sixty-two percent of Americans polled in 2018 believed that climate change has a human cause, up from 47 percent in 2013, according to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

---

That is a 3% change per year, meaning next election cycle and if the trend continues 2/3's of Americans will believe climate change is a thing, which is still idiotically low, but getting better.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

---

Agreed. I can even see many Dems voting against it if their votes mattered (control of Congress and President), because of vested interests back in their district. I could actually see this backfiring against the Dems with certain constituencies. We really don't have a best for the world mindset in this country, more like an anti-globalization movement.

---

Globalization is the problem. Cheap goods made in China with the dirtiest grid in the world; if they were made here the amount of carbon released would have been a lot less. That's a decision that was made in the interest of capital. The solution is become more self sufficient not less and protect your local environment

kelly09 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Ah yes, that great scientific journal, the Manhattan Contrarian.

---

There seems to be some interesting data presented. Why don't you address it and debate it with better data. And no Sycasey offering us Mr Science's or AOC's opinions won't cut it.

---

I mean, this has already been done. The great majority of actual scientists agree with the idea that we are nearing a crisis point on climate change. Do you actually read the links other people present to you?

I read your links. I found them wholly unconvincing, but I did read them.

kelly09 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Ah yes, that great scientific journal, the Manhattan Contrarian.

---

There seems to be some interesting data presented. Why don't you address it and debate it with better data. And no Sycasey offering us Mr Science's or AOC's opinions won't cut it.

---

I skimmed the article. They're arguing the Aussies futzed the lower average temp make climate increase seem more dramatic. I don't see how a statistical quibble/abnormality translates to NO man-made climate change. An analogy would be to argue evolution isn't valid because of one species variation weirdness trick...yet everything still points to evolution being real.

All I can say is...WHATEVER. I'm not going to legitimize the Manhattan Contrarian on a side argument that doesn't change anything. Utter bullshtt. Any reasonable Aussie would simply point to the bleached Great Barrier
Reef and record temps as indications global warming is real.

Look if you don't believe man made climate change is real after looking at the fact it means you're willfully ignorant and proud, don't understand science, you're trolling everyone or drinking the evangelical kool-aid. So which is it?

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Thread:

---

This, because the US is the lone climate denier among major industrial powers...it ups the significance of the NGD.

I think the NGD has hit a nerve exactly becuase the US has been a denier, unwilling to see reality. This will become an issue in 2020. Dems can embrace it or crap on it...but Id' guess they'd gain move votes embracing it and tossing the old f*cks like DiFi over the side. Want the youth vote...do something about the future, either ciimate or economics or both...like DUH.

AOC was brilliant in describing DiFi as a "climate delayer". Very accurate because that's exactly what she's doing...delaying action and thought. They're sort of enablers of climate deniers.

Another Bear said:

---

An analogy would be to argue evolution isn't valid because of one species variation weirdness trick...yet everything still points to evolution being real.

---

These same kinds of people made the same kinds of arguments about evolution as well.

Yogi Bear said:

---

Many aspects of the Green New Deal are unrealistic.

---

It puzzles me that the party that is supposed to be about making America great again, and holds up entrepreneurs and innovators, and who celebrates the moon landing, and American bravery in WWII, etc is so opposed to a "moon shot" on global warming...you know saving the only planet we live on that we kind of need to survive?

You'd think they would be the ones saying hey, just look at all the opportunity for innovation, opportunism, leading technology, when has America ever backed down from a challenge?, even if we only get 80% there let's go for it!...but no. It's impossible. Unrealistic. These people are crazy. Let's not change anything. Let the rest of the world figure it out.

Gee, you don't suppose that spirit of innovation has been bought and sold to the oil industry and turned into a tribal belief do you? Cuz on the face of it, the position seems at direct odds with their alleged values.

Unfortunately, that is the GOP these days. We believe this! And this means whatever we want to conform with the needs of power and profit and being opposite of Liberals.

The GOP is a debilitating state of regression, everything about it is looking backwards literally and figuratively.

Climate deniers reveal true fear about Green New Deal: That it will force Republicans to the left

Quote:

---

Climate science deniers fear the building momentum behind the Green New Deal will force Republicans to introduce their own version of climate action, a so-called "Green New Deal-lite."

Speaking at a policy forum Wednesday hosted by the Congressional Western Caucus and chaired by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), longtime climate science deniers and opponents of the ambitious climate resolution expressed concerns that calls for climate action will push all politicians to the left.

One of the "dangers" of the Green New Deal, said Myron Ebell, director of global warming and international environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, is that "by expanding the political spectrum of what's in the debate, it's moving the debate left and it's creating a very large space for a certain class of people, many of them in the Republican Party, to start talking about how we need to have moderate solutions, or reasonable solutions."

---

I think this nails it...the New Green Deal forces the conservatives into dialogue and to hatch their own plan and solution...because the American people (like moderate GOP) want some action on it. There he just said it. However as the Party of No and the Party of Do Nothing...they simply can't produce anything, basically useless and dumb.

Another Bear said:

---

Climate deniers reveal true fear about Green New Deal: That it will force Republicans to the left

Quote:

---

Climate science deniers fear the building momentum behind the Green New Deal will force Republicans to introduce their own version of climate action, a so-called "Green New Deal-lite."

Speaking at a policy forum Wednesday hosted by the Congressional Western Caucus and chaired by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), longtime climate science deniers and opponents of the ambitious climate resolution expressed concerns that calls for climate action will push all politicians to the left.

One of the "dangers" of the Green New Deal, said Myron Ebell, director of global warming and international environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, is that "by expanding the political spectrum of what's in the debate, it's moving the debate left and it's creating a very large space for a certain class of people, many of them in the Republican Party, to start talking about how we need to have moderate solutions, or reasonable solutions."

---

I think this nails it...the New Green Deal forces the conservatives into dialogue and to hatch their own plan and solution...because the American people (like moderate GOP) want some action on it. There he just said it. However as the Party of No and the Party of Do Nothing...they simply can't produce anything, basically useless and dumb.

---

They see it . . . the left has finally figured out their tactics and is giving the right a dose of their own medicine.

The NGD might be the fulcrum point that will grind the GOP into the ground because even some moderate GOP and environmentally minded conservatives want action and they see the need to engage. I think it might be a big issue in 2020. The stone walling only works for so long, until people start talking about real solutions and fixing things and that is now happening.

The U.S. has been caught in a morass of do nothing regarding climate change...but that's going to change. Kids looking to the future will force the issue...but by golly, so will a bunch of conservatives in Florida because their homes and net worth are threatened. Conservatives are afraid reasonable GOP will talk, and that's a problem when you stand for nothing and doing nothing. People doing something forces a move.

Another Bear said:

---

The NGD might be the fulcrum point that will grind the GOP into the ground because even some moderate GOP and environmentally minded conservatives want action and they see the need to engage. I think it might be a big issue in 2020.

---

It might be in 2020. For right now, it is just making a lot of noise which will be snuffed out in the Senate, but perhaps it will be a tipping point for some voters when they're deciding on a President, new congressmen, and new senators. Right now, there's just not enough votes to make it happen. It might not even get out of the House.

I sense momentum and from the quote above, so do the conservative and they want to SHUT IT DOWN. They want to stop dialogue because then they have to deal with facts and solutions and that's a huge problem if you're the party of NO.

There's a saying in hardline environmental circles, Civil Rights spawned the environmental movement because it didn't deal with the touchy subject of race but it was a cause that was easy to get behind. Without a "natural fight", hippies got behind Mother Earth. Some have gone as far as to say, the environmental movement was civil rights for white folks. The difference today is pretty much everyone can get behind it, minus hardline conservative, deniers and wingnuts. Heck, there's a saying, the Sierra Club is whiter than the GOP...and there's many GOP in the Sierra Club.

On that note, the NGD can cover similar space but not neglecting race but instead dealing with "softer" politics or more relatable issues. It goes way beyond Trump, although he's obviously an issue of obstruction.

The thing that tips it for me...the youth are acrtively involved and this is a generational fight more that's anything...and why DiFi went all old cranky grandma on those kids, and many establishment Dems are poo-pooing it. To which I say...do so at your own peril. There is going to be a huge voting block behind the NGD. DNC Chair Perez said AOC is the future of the Democratic party...and this is her signature legislation.

Democrats would be smart to court it now...because the GOP won't and can't. The numbers say to do so. However the mainstream Dems have shot themselves in the foot before. See HRC 2016.

Anarchistbear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

---

Agreed. I can even see many Dems voting against it if their votes mattered (control of Congress and President), because of vested interests back in their district. I could actually see this backfiring against the Dems with certain constituencies. We really don't have a best for the world mindset in this country, more like an anti-globalization movement.

---

Globalization is the problem. Cheap goods made in China with the dirtiest grid in the world; if they were made here the amount of carbon released would have been a lot less. That's a decision that was made in the interest of capital. The solution is become more self sufficient not less and protect your local environment

---

I very much agree with your first post above. And wife's reply.
But this button one I'll quibble with.
People make the decision to buy China not because their electricity is the cheapest, it's their labor and raw materials, too. The entire thing is cheaper. I know that's what you are saying, but the cost of the electricity is a small portion of the end product.
How are we going to improve as a planet? The first two posts paint a sad picture.

golden sloth said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Kind of surprised no one started a thread about the New Green Deal. Of course lots of back and forth on it, and there was DiFi's old lady dismissal of middle schoolers lobbying for the future.

Pretty telling that 12 y.o. kids are taking up the mantle and fighting for the future, their future. Not only the kids who confronted DiFi but 20 kids took the day off and confronted Mitch the Turtle Boy senator.

Media is following this one and will for a while. Lots of comments about how the U.S. can't afford and it's a goofy idea that can't possibly work. And yet there's the UN report that the world has about 12 years to address man made climate change...or it's OVER.

Best I've read went something like this, "If you think the GND people are kooky, at least they're working with science and aren't totally off their rocker like climate deniers". This puts the conversation in perspective, and the fight.

The funny thing is there's even Dems who are saying it's too costly (like irreversible climate change will be cheaper) and not practical...the public is getting down on them. Seems most people want something done about climate and yet these pols are dragging their feet.

Comments on the GND, feasibility, reality, costs? Or is addressing climate change and the economy too much work and hassle...so just screw it?

---

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-2-24-the-greatest-scientific-fraud-of-all-time-part-xxi

---

About that...

Quote:

---

OSLO (Reuters) - Evidence for man-made global warming has reached a "gold standard" level of certainty, adding pressure for cuts in greenhouse gases to limit rising temperatures, scientists said on Monday.

"Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals," the U.S.-led team wrote in the journal Nature Climate Change of satellite measurements of rising temperatures over the past 40 years.

They said confidence that human activities were raising the heat at the Earth's surface had reached a "five-sigma" level, a statistical gauge meaning there is only a one-in-a-million chance that the signal would appear if there was no warming.

---

The good news is here though:

Quote:

---

Sixty-two percent of Americans polled in 2018 believed that climate change has a human cause, up from 47 percent in 2013, according to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

---

That is a 3% change per year, meaning next election cycle and if the trend continues 2/3's of Americans will believe climate change is a thing, which is still idiotically low, but getting better.

---

It's pointless.
Humans are selfish.
You could have a situation where the climate goes Super Wack, such that nobody can deny it any longer. But at that point there will be such turmoil to production, there will be so many climate refugees, that people will choose food and their basic needs over climate needs.
Only the rich can afford to make ALL the necessary changes. But most of the world is poor. Very poor.

"Humans are selfish.
You could have a situation where the climate goes Super Wack"

We are already entering the Super Wack and selfish humans who are still getting rich dont want anything to change and dont care what happens after they are dead (like Trump's attitude on national debt).

Once problem becomes overwhelming, then too the selfish will move to self-preservation mode: the world is a mess but I can still get mine and try and isolate myself from the consequences (as long as I can cut the bread line who cares if others are starving).

The masses have to force the change and solutions because the few don't care, and they became the few by not caring and being selfish so expecting anything else is foolish.

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

The US is the biggest fossil fuel producer in the world, has an economy based on acquisition and consumption and has the highest per capita emissions in the world. There are too many people feasting who don't want to leave the all you can eat buffet. No way anything comes of this in the current political climate.

---

Agreed. I can even see many Dems voting against it if their votes mattered (control of Congress and President), because of vested interests back in their district. I could actually see this backfiring against the Dems with certain constituencies. We really don't have a best for the world mindset in this country, more like an anti-globalization movement.

---

Globalization is the problem. Cheap goods made in China with the dirtiest grid in the world; if they were made here the amount of carbon released would have been a lot less. That's a decision that was made in the interest of capital. The solution is become more self sufficient not less and protect your local environment

---

I very much agree with your first post above. And wife's reply.
But this button one I'll quibble with.
People make the decision to buy China not because their electricity is the cheapest, it's their labor and raw materials, too. The entire thing is cheaper. I know that's what you are saying, but the cost of the electricity is a small portion of the end product.
How are we going to improve as a planet? The first two posts paint a sad picture.

---

We aren't going to improve especially if we regard joining a confederation of polluters ( Paris) as progress. The only thing that improves the climate- to the extent needed-is leaving fossil fuels in the ground not bulls$it incrementalism but that requires a change of consciousness and a move away from consumption and acquisition. But the real power in this country won't allow it- that includes Democrats. AOC is a marginal pipsqueak.

My point about China is not so much electricity but that we will condone slave labor, pollution and destruction of the environment for cheap goods and that cheap power and no environmental regulations facilitate this. We wouldn't allow it here but are fine with allowing it there to say nothing of hollowing out the middle of our country. Why? Because the driving force of our system is private return on capital not human welfare.

No solutions will come from DC or global treaties. The only good thing that may happen is a Tea Party revolt among Democrats which leads to the splintering of the party

Quote:

---

.... and selfish humans who are still getting rich dont want anything to change ....

---

But, actually, you've got something wrong there.
It's not just the rich who are getting rich off oil and such. We cannot just point fingers at rich Americans or the wealthy capitalists at all.

It's also very much the poor, who drive cars to their low wage jobs.
It's the rich and poor alike who eat farting and burping cows.
It's all of us who turn the lights on when it's dark, use heat when cold or A/C when hot.
Global warming knows no race, economic class, or political persuasion. Al Gore famously flew around in his polluting plane while spreading gospel about pollution!
Humans have developed global warming technologies (cattle farming included) and nobody can get enough.

We very much need to transition away from technologies that injury the environment, toward newer ways that allow us to live peaceably on this planet with our fellow earthly inhabitants.
It won't happen organically, but by leadership from the top. Governments can lead, must lead here!
The Green New Deal is immature and incomplete. But it's a good start.