(08-26-2019 05:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: (08-26-2019 03:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote: https://www.yang2020.com/blog/climate-change/
It's a long read. And you won't like it. There's a lot of radical stuff in there. But the basic five goals are
1. Build a sustainable economy by transitioning away from fossil fuels to renewable energy, upgrading our infrastructure, and improving the way we farm and use land. Public financing options will allow individuals to make the right decisions for their families.
2. Build a sustainable world. The United States, throughout history, has led the world in times of crisis. We’re the most entrepreneurial country in the history of the world. It’s time to activate the American imagination and work ethic to provide the innovation and technology that will power the rest of the world.
3. Move our people to higher ground. Natural disasters and other effects of climate change are already causing damage and death. We need to adapt our country to this new reality.
4. Reverse the damage we’ve done. Research needs to be done on removing carbon from our atmosphere, cooling the planet and rejuvenating ecosystems.
5. Hold future administrations accountable. We need to pass a constitutional amendment that creates a duty on the federal and state governments to be stewards for the environment.
The lofty platitudes sound great. Who doesn't want a sustainable world?
But the devil is in the details. And the details are invariably ever greater intrusion of the government--specifically the federal government--in ways that have never, ever, in the history of the planet, worked.
Bottom line is it's fine for us to say that we will accept some economic degradation to accomplish minuscule improvement in the climate change arena. The problem is that for half the world's population, even minor economic degradation means they starve, or do without closing, or shelter, or all three. And it we don't get that half onboard with what we do, our efforts are worse than meaningless.
(08-26-2019 02:44 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote: #1 on my wish list for any Democratic candidate is Climate Change. #'s won't like Yang's plan announced today because it does feature many of the same things in the Green New Deal. But you can easily search for it online if you want.
I sure would like to see Trump do something about Climate Change, other than ignore it and make fun of other people's plans. Or he can just skip meetings on it like he did today at G7. Getting out of the Paris Accord is not a plan.
The bolded in your comment may well be your opinion, but it appears to come off as almost completely unhinged in the face of other far more immediately pressing problems facing human beings in society today.
But I'll play a bit. I've bolded your points to make it easier to respond to:
1. Build a sustainable economy... I agree and think we are seeing a direct contrast in how sustainable a draconian, tax-everything, government iron-fist controlled by elite-o-crats economy sputters to a near halt versus an economy where the market and innovation decided what is best based upon actual wants and needs of the vast majority of people, not an oligarchical elite and detached few without real0-world experience in sustaining businesses that actually provide jobs and security to actual human beings versus theoretical thesis papers from government granted studies and conversations over bongwater. For the poor, fossil fuel combustion engines and older vehicles to drive are a lifeblood to improving their lot in life. Government programs like Cash-for-clunkers hurt poor people proportionally far more than they helped the environment almost to an infinite scale. Yet you propose to do the equivalent of it more and better. Experiment failure, but you double down? No thanks.
2. Build a sustainable world.... The world will not be sustained very long, at least not for humans, if the attitude is depersonifying and murdering them in the millions (and billions, worldwide) just because a few elites deem them expendable, or the byproduct of their selfish, uncontrolled desires. Ironic that you propose to strictly control peoples' desires with respect to the way they choose to live their lives, but you deny the self control of your own desires (or those who subscribe to your brand of groupthink) or the limitations on your own selfishness when it comes to other people's very human rights to existence itself. The hyposcrisy is mind-blowingly ignorant. The world can never be sustained by a people who institutionalize and codify the devaluing of sustaining life itself. Again, no thanks.
3. Move our people to higher ground.... Here I can find some common ground (ha, ha). I have no love or joy for those who build in flood plains or on beachfronts and then, when the inevitable disaster strikes, forcibly use the government to redistribute wealth so that they can make the same foolish mistake again, while other, more prudent people are forced to pay for their selfishness. How would I "move" people? Not forcibly, as I suspect is what you are directing. I would merely propose eliminating completely (100%) any and all government flood insurance. period. People are free to build and live where they want. But if a flood comes, it is on them and them alone to rebuild if they wish and are able. There is a reason no private insurance will cover them. When you take the market out of bad decisions, you hurt the country and the world by enabling waste and stupidity. Another benefit of my approach: less and smaller government and less and smaller taxation. Those who choose folly will sustain the repercussions.
4.[/b] Reverse the damage we’ve done....I don;t equate some extra carbon emission with CFC's, which did hurt our planet and needed to be removed. Unless you can explan to me how you are going to reliably prevent any more volcanic eruptions anywhere on the planet (not to mention how you're going to somehow regulate and enforce China, India and the other actual polluters and carbon emitters from doing so--which I must have missed in your posts) then this is a waste of time and a lie. Sky still standing up just fine. So, No Thanks.
5. Hold future administrations accountable.... Of course; the answer to every problem, real and imagined, i8s More governement and more taxes? Why does that not surprise me?
How about this instead: you and the handful of others like you are 'concerned" about these issues. So concerned that immediate action must be taken. So, I want to allow you to do so. I propose an opt-in set of additional taxes, worldwide, that the international community can impose to specifically target your areas of concern. Each tax would require a separate individual opt-in on a yearly basis. Those taxes collected would then be administered by a group of folks elected by those taxed in each country specifically for the purpose of "solving" these "problems." You and others would also be allowed to contribute more than the initial tax to any problem, to your heart's desire, up to and limited by your own personal individual wealth. You and others would never be allowed to infringe on the freedom of other people to not spend their money in such ways by compulsion. We could then all benefit from seeing who actually would be willing, individually, year after year, to apply their own economic sustenance to work on these , and thus gauge how serious they actually are. So, how much money can I put you down for from your own personal wealth for your proposals? Post a picture of your check for all to see, FBO, and we can go from there.
Now, let's get to work--with YOUR dollars, not mine.