Green New Deal
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2019-02-05 7:28 AM |
Pro 15655 | Subject: Green New Deal Obviously, this is not going to happen for a number of reasons.....but this wording, in regard to financing this "new deal", was written by a person in Congress??? Or did they leave their notes out and their third grader found them and put the finishing touches on it? LMAO it envisions financing by “the federal government, using a combination of the Federal Reserve, a new public bank or system of regional and specialized public banks, public venture funds and such other vehicles or structures that the select committee deems appropriate, in order to ensure that interest and other investment returns generated from public investments made in connection with the plan will be returned to the treasury, reduce taxpayer burden and allow for more investment.”
WOW!!!! |
|
2019-02-05 8:40 AM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Originally posted by Left Brain Obviously, this is not going to happen for a number of reasons.....but this wording, in regard to financing this "new deal", was written by a person in Congress??? Or did they leave their notes out and their third grader found them and put the finishing touches on it? LMAO it envisions financing by “the federal government, using a combination of the Federal Reserve, a new public bank or system of regional and specialized public banks, public venture funds and such other vehicles or structures that the select committee deems appropriate, in order to ensure that interest and other investment returns generated from public investments made in connection with the plan will be returned to the treasury, reduce taxpayer burden and allow for more investment.”
WOW!!!! IOWs....."we will nationalize banks...and anything else we (the 'select committee' need to". ETA. I think democrats mis-read the mid-terms. Instead of just seeing the House flip as a referendum on Trump, they think the country wants to move to the extreme left towards socialism. I hope they run on the free stuff and bigger government platform in 2020. Even the Starbuck's guy thinks the democrats have lost their collective minds. And any man that can get people to pay $6 for a 0.50 cent cup of coffee is a genius! Edited by Rogillio 2019-02-05 8:45 AM |
2019-02-05 8:49 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal When you don't have a platform as a party, and some in your party win mid-terms after running on ridiculous ideas, I guess you just adopt those ideas as the platform. You couldn't make it up. |
2019-02-05 1:13 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Yesterday I visited a school assembly w/ teens in Queens. One of them asked, “What can WE do to combat climate change?” 2 recs: – Skip disposable razors+switch to safety razors – Give your tummy a break! Skip meat/dairy for a meal (easiest is bfast, I do banana & peanut butter) pic.twitter.com/BnAg4x5lGS — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 5, 2019 So there you have it! Safety razors gonna save the planet! Good lord, ignorance gone to seed! She might just as well have told them not to pee in the ocean so they don't contribute to sea level rising. Tell the kids to walk or bike to/from school. Tell them to quit watching TV and wasting electricity. Tell them they don't need a new iPhone every time a new model comes out. Tell them to skip an entire meal or fast one day a week. Tell them to quit drinking soft drinks that come in plastic bottles. Tell them to quit passing gas and adding methane to the atmosphere. |
2019-02-06 8:57 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Just watch Pelosi in this clip......and let her deal with Ocrazio Chavez. It takes a crazy person to deal with a nut job. LOL Edited by Left Brain 2019-02-06 9:00 AM |
2019-02-06 9:29 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
, Arizona | Subject: RE: Green New Deal She's not wrong, and neither are you. There are plenty of more effective methods to reduce waste and energy than what she suggested. It's easier to make small changes over time than to go all in. I had some friends who decided all their food shopping would result in zero plastic waste, so no processed or packaged items. I think they lasted a month before throwing in the towel and gave up on it entirely going back to their original habits. They might have been more successful and still going if they had made smaller changes over time, they would have more of a "I can do this, it's not that difficult" mentality and build your way up from there. Trying to change your average Americans consumerist lifestyle overnight won't work, but lots of small changes from large amounts of people add up to big results. I'm always amazed when I see the resources required to raise livestock, it takes an enormous amount of water to grow the feed they eat. 1,800 gallons of water for 1lb of beef for example. Demand for beef has gone down in recent years, down 19% since 2005 for a reduction in 185 million metric tons in emissions (equivalent to 39 million cars/year). That's not insignificant. Neither is avoiding single use items. |
|
2019-02-06 9:45 AM in reply to: Synon |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal We eat more meat than we ever have......but we also recycle now. We also cut the plastic rings that cans sometimes come in.....so they don't get wrapped around a dolphin's nose, or something like that. I know we save metric tons of bullchit from entering our home. |
2019-02-06 11:13 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal I think the 'issue' is people who are penny-wise and dollar-foolish. My wife tries to recycle plastic. The problem is, empty bottles tend to stink. So she will rinse them out first. I told her she is wasting water and energy that it takes to pump and clean the water.....and she burns gas taking the can of plastic to the recycling place. She just smiled at me and ignored my comments. I don't drink soda so I figure I am doing my part. On a semi-related note....when I was 5 years old I went camping with my grandfather. When we broke camp we cleaned up. He always had us pick up more than just our own trash. He said if everyone left the camp site cleaner than it was when they got there the parks would all be clean. So this concept has stayed with me and all my life I've tried to leave campsites cleaner than I found it. |
2019-02-06 12:11 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal I've spent my life in the outdoors and I always do my part it leave it cleaner than I found it.....or at the very least, as clean. Who deosn't want to enjoy and live in a clean place, free of litter and other pollution? But it ends right there. I am part of the largest and smartest species on the planet.....and I'll eat almost every other species in some form or another.....and I'll kill them to do it. My species is also multiplying at a pace that the Earth cannot sustain....and when the tipping point comes, all of this talk will be just what it is.....a giant waste of time and energy. Mankind is hard on the earth's environment......you won't even make a small dent in that fact in your lifetime, or your children's. It's the Earth.....it doesn't care about you or your politics. It takes care of itself. |
2019-02-06 1:14 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
, Arizona | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Unfortunately the trade off can't be avoided. It does take energy and water to clean that plastic bottle, fuel to bring it somewhere, and your local recycling place is just shipping it somewhere else so even more resources used. Turning it into something else probably takes more energy than it took to make it in the first place. But left in a landfill it could be 1000 years before it decomposes. Which is the lesser evil? Depends who you ask. Not using single use containers when you can is the best solution, though just having some self awareness of the trash you generate is a good first step for most people. I bought a coworker a coffee mug to keep in his office at work, previously he would use several Styrofoam cups every single day and had been for 10 years (that's a lot of cups if you do the math). It's so easy to not give a though when the trash just disappears, out of sight out of mind. My parents instilled the same camping philosophy in me, honestly I think Alexandria's message is a very similar takeaway... leave it better than you found it. As an individual my choices have an infinitesimally small effect on the earth, but in numbers it makes a massive difference (as you saw with the beef). This isn't about politics, it's about leaving it cleaner than we found for us and future generations to enjoy. We had the capability to be "green" with large scale energy projects like Nuclear power, but those seem to have gone by the wayside. Demand for electricity is going to skyrocket over the next decade, regardless of the lefts hard on for wind and solar they are poor replacements. (God I hope Bernie doesn't run in 2020) |
2019-02-06 1:47 PM in reply to: Synon |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal I wish someone would do a study on electric cars. The electricity used to charge the batteries likely comes from a coal-fired power plant. More importantly, lithium-ion batteries have a limited life and if not properly disposed of presents a different sort of environmental problem. The more I learn and the more I think on it the more convince I am that the only way to 'save the planet' before the planet saves itself by consuming us (LB's point) is to focus on negative population growth.....even zero population growth would probably work. It's estimated world population will grow to 11 billion by 2100. That is a lot of mouths to feed, shelters to build and a lot of CO2 producing bodies. Maybe the planet can support 11 billion......but it's just a matter of time before we have 22 billion....then 44 billion.....then we are in soylent green territory. Instead of buying/selling 'carbon credits' why not allocate each person 1 child.....2 per couple. If you want 3 kids then you can buy some else's child allocation that doesn't want children. This is mostly TIC since it creates a host of moral and ethical and religious issues....and is basically unenforceable. |
|
2019-02-06 3:04 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Beef consumption ......"down 19% since 2005 for a reduction in 185 million metric tons in emissions (equivalent to 39 million cars/year)" Source please? I'm not buying those numbers. Edited by Left Brain 2019-02-06 3:04 PM |
2019-02-06 3:22 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Green New Deal |
2019-02-06 3:28 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Ughhhh.....any of you folks ever been around a chicken operation? Were those "emissions" added back in or are we just not as mad at chicklens as we are cows? Still, I see that Pelosi applauds your efforts.
Edited by Left Brain 2019-02-06 3:34 PM |
2019-02-06 3:43 PM in reply to: 0 |
, Arizona | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Takes significantly less resources to create 1lb of chicken, I think around a quarter or less of the water for one thing. Avoiding the methane is a bonus. Eat mor chicken Edited by Synon 2019-02-06 3:45 PM |
2019-02-06 4:46 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal We buy our beef straight ftom the farmer/rancher....I just want to see the breakdown of the supposed 360,000 gallons of water it takes to give us that 200 lbs. we buy at a time. .......he usually keeps about 300 head of cattle per year.....that 72,000,000 gallons per year is a lot of rain. LOL Edited by Left Brain 2019-02-06 4:49 PM |
|
2019-02-06 5:58 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal I bought 2 black angus bucket calves. Named one T-bone and the other named Rib-eye. Only had hot wire to keep them in. Found out a cows hide I’d 7x this thicker than a horse. They started getting out so I took them to a butcher before they were fully grown. I too question what it takes to raise a cow |
2019-02-06 6:09 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal I'm going to tell you what it doesn't take......nearly 500,000 gallons of water. LMAOOOO |
2019-02-06 6:12 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Originally posted by Left Brain We buy our beef straight ftom the farmer/rancher....I just want to see the breakdown of the supposed 360,000 gallons of water it takes to give us that 200 lbs. we buy at a time. .......he usually keeps about 300 head of cattle per year.....that 72,000,000 gallons per year is a lot of rain. LOL actually LB, that isn't very much rain. USDA recommends 1 acre of land per head of cattle, so lets say this guy has a 300 acre ranch. The average age of slaughter for a cow is about 36 months. 72,000,000 gallons of water is 221 acre-feet, or 2652 acre-inches. Divide that by 300 acres, thats is 8.84 inches/cow. Divide that by 3 years, and that is 2.94 inches of precipitation/year. i had an intership at NRCS, about a decade ago, so a couple of those numbers might be off, but not by an order of magnitude. Here in maryland we get an average of 30 inches of rain per year. It is zero issue here. Where it becomes an issue is places like California or other low-precipitation rangelands. many ranchers also fatten cattle on feedlots and don't give them rangeland. |
2019-02-06 6:23 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Let's say 20 inches of rain in a year on 100 acres. That's estimated to be 54,000,000 gallons. Let's use your 100 cattle on 100 acres....standard rule is 50 cow/calf pairs for every 2 acres. (of course that's considering good ground.....much land will support less, for sure) Let's say 400 lbs. per head of cattle......you need 72,000,000 gallons. We're 18,000,000 gallons short IF EVERY DROP WENT TO THE CATTLE for food and water. And BTW - the avg. weight of a steer to slaughter is about 1100-1200 lbs....which yields about 500 lbs. of meat. Uh, yeah......................No. LOL Statistics..........make 'em say whatever you want......just don't try to tell me it takes 720,000 gallons of water to raise 500 lbs of trimmed, boneless meat from a cow....that's complete and total bullchit....prolly made up by somebody who doesn't eat meat and saw a cow one time in a John Wayne movie while eating tofu popcorn, and believed by people who get their news from twitter. The world is a better place when people just eat, and stop trying to figure out how their food is somehow bad for them and their environment. Edited by Left Brain 2019-02-06 6:45 PM |
2019-02-07 7:10 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal 98.4% of that water goes right back into the ground after it passes thru the cow. 84.5% of statistics are made up on the spot. My wife has 3 horses and has gutters/drains off one side of the barn to collect water. It doesn't take much rain till her 500 gallon stock tanks is overflowing. Eat more chicken....and fish. The earth is 2/3rds covered in water and 1/3 covered in land. The good Lord must of figured we'd do more fishing than farming. |
|
2019-02-07 9:05 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal “It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive,” Pelosi told Politico on Wednesday. “The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it right?” Green Dream. LOL I think that is better name for it. The Green Dream is a complete non-starter. It is a vision of naïve socialist and they are making the democrat party look ridiculous. Nancy...or somebody, needs to rein in the chooks in her party and try to get something meaningful accomplished. AOC needs to tell Nancy, "You have to pass the bill to find out what is in it." |
2019-02-07 11:47 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Green New Deal “It reads like a Republican parody of the Democratic platform. The best part: they are serious.” LOL. I guess they read The Art of the Deal and swung for the fence in hope of getting 10% of their Dream. Good luck with that. I especially like the “garrunteed job with a wage to support a family”. Sweet. Does this mean I can retire in place and can’t be fired? |
2019-02-07 12:04 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
2019-02-07 12:05 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Green New Deal Originally posted by Left Brain Let's say 20 inches of rain in a year on 100 acres. That's estimated to be 54,000,000 gallons. Let's use your 100 cattle on 100 acres....standard rule is 50 cow/calf pairs for every 2 acres. (of course that's considering good ground.....much land will support less, for sure) Let's say 400 lbs. per head of cattle......you need 72,000,000 gallons. We're 18,000,000 gallons short IF EVERY DROP WENT TO THE CATTLE for food and water. And BTW - the avg. weight of a steer to slaughter is about 1100-1200 lbs....which yields about 500 lbs. of meat. Uh, yeah......................No. LOL Statistics..........make 'em say whatever you want......just don't try to tell me it takes 720,000 gallons of water to raise 500 lbs of trimmed, boneless meat from a cow....that's complete and total bullchit....prolly made up by somebody who doesn't eat meat and saw a cow one time in a John Wayne movie while eating tofu popcorn, and believed by people who get their news from twitter. The world is a better place when people just eat, and stop trying to figure out how their food is somehow bad for them and their environment. divide by 3 lb, its total water, not water per year. and go do some research i guess on how much water a cow consumes, and on how much water is needed to grow the food it consumes. |
|