23 5

How many of you support Ocasio Cortez’s “Green New Deal” to make it an emergency priority to discontinue the use use of all fossils fuels by 2030 and be 100% green.

View Results
Trajan61 8 Feb 8

Post a comment Author often replies/likes Reply Author often replies/likes Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Another preposterous idea from this idiot


Best thing to happen to republicans and Trumps 2020 campaign.She exposes liberal ignorance daily.Sometimes multiple times a day


Anyone that would support this moron is a moron themselves.


I am so tired of seeing this thing in the media.She needs a pink MAMAS hat (Make America mediocre and socialist )


Her so called Green New Deal would bankrupt the country and cause millions to die of starvation. It would also likely cause revolution.

As will continuing as we are.

Based on what? You are just spouting off whatever because you don't understand innovation and are unaware of current tech. Are you aware of how much the oil companies get in tax dollars. It's socialism for them (and countless other industries) and vulture capitalism for us.

@dokala I’ve yet to see a single electric truck or tractor. It’s going to take a long time to get to 100% green unless we figure out how to harness fusion economically. And I don’t think the oil companies are getting subsidies from the government anymore.

Oh, you live by anecdotal evidence and thinking on your own. See the flaws there?

@Trajan61 finally some common sense

Oil subsidies continue

Our rail infrastructure is in dire need of modernization and could be electric.
Our inland waterway system is unparalleled in the world and also needs to be modernized.
Both of those are far cheaper than truck transport.

@SassyLady I don’t think that’s correct.

@SassyLady He leases it for oil and gas drilling. Hardly the same as giving it to them. The government gets paid for those leases.


Absurd rhetoric.

This would imply, for example, that every one of us would have to get rid of our current cars and buy new electric cars in the next 12 years... that every one of us would have to get rid of our gas appliances and buy new electric appliances in the next 12 years.

I expect this type of unrealistic idealism from teenagers, not adults.

Or conversions. Why so binary?

Better get on. We've already had decades to convert, but instead some applauded Reagan removing the solar panels.


Sorry, that whole green thing is nothing more than a hijacking of the US economy.

Funny. You don't look like an ostrich.

One of the sensible ones.


The vote on this post is sobering evidence of just how extreme and irrational the average participant on this website is.

Yes I agree 100%. There are a lot of extremist on this website.

Right you are Doug.


And she says she wants to benefit the Latino community....but her Spanish is so deficient that it causes pain to hear her.


I guess it depends on whether you think having healthy food, healthy people, clean water and clean air is important enough to make a few sacrifices.


I think it is very achievable. It takes commitment but the U S could do it. It would take a space program type commitment but it could be done. It would create jobs and lead to advances in science. I am for it!



Even if you could create enough solar and wind electricity to run the vehicles to keep the economy going, you would still not be able to fly. That alone would put a halt to the economy.

Is someone saying that flights should be grounded to accomplish the goal?

@AlPastor If planes run on fossil fuels they are. I don't know of any electric air liners out there.

@Captain_Feelgood Is someone saying that flights should be grounded to accomplish the goal?

@AlPastor The purposal calls for us to be 100% green by 2030. Since the only electric aircraft I know of are small drones that means the current aircraft are out. Also there would be no more steak as farting cows are to be banned as well.
Ocasio-Cortez contradicts herself on role of government in massive and unprecedented 'Green New Deal'


@Trajan61 It's a goal. No airlines will be grounded if that overly optimistic goal isn't met.

@AlPastor A very idiotic goal at that.

@AlPastor Hmmm... Setting unrealistic goals you know probably cannot be met.. Speaks volumes about the mental state of those proposing them, and those agreeing with them as well for that matter. Just makes one shake their head in disbelief.

@Captain_Feelgood It's a starting point for negotiations. An "Art of the Deal" type thing. LOL

@AlPastor ::""discontinue use of all fossil fuels""" Yeah, unless you have electric airliners, YOU Are shutting down the whole air travel arena... You do get that, yes?

@Captain_Feelgood Seriously, no one wants to or is going to shut down air travel. Also, I found where you got the ridiculous idea of "shutting down the whole air travel arena."

"It would shut down American energy, which I don't think the people in Texas are going to be happy with," Fear Mongering Trump said elsewhere in the speech, eliciting cheers from the gullible low information audience of more than 5,000. "It would shut down a little thing called air travel. How do you take a train to Europe?"

@AlPastor Mmm, no.. American Energy CORP Is an oil company in Houston, has nothing to do with an airline. I merely put two and two together as far as fossil fuel use in the transportation industry.


Good idea!


Once the military develop a non fossil fuel, oil would be discarded in a flash.
In emmision counts, no one counts the military; factories, ships, planes, vehicles etc


I support on most things but I think that her proposed green deal is either a tool to incite the right or possibly a push for compromise.

Either way it’s hard to tell because she’s most likely a player of call of duty with the way she starts shooting before she gets around a corner when she addresses certain policies.

But that’s also what happens when you have an actual victim of our political system make their way in she’s come for heads and she doesn’t seem to care what uniform you’re wearing you’re either for the common man or against either way she’s not backing down.

And finally if she was to propose that by 2030 that all urban areas with a population higher than 750,000 during its daytime operations that they would have to be completely green then yes by all means.

But to say that for those who live areas where there’s less than a million people within 20 mile radius is a bit absurd.
Personally I want to know how she plans on moving freight from end of the country to the next?
Either way she seems to be sincere in her efforts but she’s needs to also save some ammunition for the real fights.

Just wanted to comment re: "moving freight from one end of the country to the next." There is a green solution for this already. It's called ET3 (Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies). Musk is pushing a "lighter" version of it he invented called Hyperloop. ET3 is far superior and would go a long way in "greening" mass transit and freight transport globally. Additionally, it would "shrink" the earth by many factors making it possible to travel to the other side of the planet in about 4 hours vs 24 hours by air.

@Maindawg Well like i said this is either a demand or push for compromise.

Yes do and should make some changes but doing things the American way by swinging from one extreme to the next only results in creating bigger issues down the road.

But as far as corporate greed goes it’s nothing compared to having a currency based upon the sales of oil. We will also need to rectify that for which I cannot find in her plans.

@IAMGROOT Ok I do believe that musk does have some ideas but I’m gonna have to ask just how much of this tube has been built tested and had nearly a billion tons of freight pushed through it in one day??

Also I can assume that you’re great fan of musk so therefore you’re unlikely to see any issues with his thinking.So I’m gonna do that for you ok.

His tube hasn’t been proven to also withstand any natural disasters such as earthquakes above 7.0, sustained wildfires, tornadoes, hurricanes or as we all recently discovered with the recent polar vortex his cars batteries were draining at twice the rate.

We also have to have a backup plan for if it’s power delivery fails then we’ll have people and goods stuck in a straw losing time and money which won’t fly and how do we plan to move them from there?

Also how does he plan to move freight from the south to north (each way) ??? Or from all ports in general for that matter so unless he’s got an actual plan for replacing every single highway system in this country without blocking all other roads while doing so this will not work.

So believe it or not there will be a need for trucks to transport all of goods at one or another and if you think asking people to give up their firearms then they have no idea what kind of fight they’ll have over people’s performance and classic cars.
Just saying. ?

@SassyLady You lived off the grid but you’re on here? ok.
it’s a wonderful idea but not by 2030 not without a very hard fight and furthermore it doesn’t really matter who came up with it there still has to be an answer for what will back our currency then??

Not everyone wants to live off the grid and some of us would burn down the world of those who believe that it’s their right to force us and then drive away in 1000 hp car on our way to a gas station.

So the green deal needs to be a path to compromise and as I said in the beginning I believe that areas that are extremely over populated should have to be the ones not the whole country.

@SassyLady The off the grid folks I’ve met usually have to ride into town to use computers because they can create their own electricity and most are in areas where there is no internet for miles.

Well we are too late the whole world waited until the first person crossed the finish line before we started running. Now all we can slow it down but everyone being forced to drive a battery within 11 years will not change anything.

And gold standard?? Not since Nixon we’re oil sales based so stop selling oil then what?

@48thRonin Didn't your daddy tell you to never assume? I mentioned Hyperloop as an inferior option to ET3. Both are patented technologies, but work a little differently with the main similarity being they operate in relative vacuums. Transitioning to this type of transport system (which yes, could interconnect all major cities, nations, and continents) will cause tremendous disruption and will eliminate the trucking, airline, and shipping industries. And of course, there would need to be pairs of tubes since we're not talking about data packets. The battle to make this happen will be and already is unbelievably challenging with the need to get buy-in from governments everywhere. Hell, we can't even build a fucking "high-speed" rail connecting SF and LA here in CA (something I am against). Imagine the right-of-way challenges here. I believe this is the way to go though. It's fast, it's green and while it will displace millions of jobs, creating this infrastructure will create millions of jobs across the spectrum. This is a great Capitalist solution that not only addresses the supposed "human caused" climate change, but will usher in the next generation of travel and transport. To me it's a no-brainer and it has nothing to do with Musk. His high-profile celebrity is getting Hyperloop a lot of attention and investors, but it is ET3 that holds the real promise.

@IAMGROOT Looking for the inferior comment but I guess you’re daddy didn’t tell you to not lie.?
But anyway I’ve actually driven a tractor trailer and urge you to look at an atlas map that features all highways and ports then ask yourself just where the hell are they going run all of these tubes?

Either way this where I’m done with this subject so have a good night dude

@48thRonin Sure, but why call me a liar?

@IAMGROOT I’m assumed that when someone doesn’t say something that they claimed to have said. ?


I think we should examine her proposals...evaluate and choose those that will give us a favorable outcome.


I think it is a worth while goal. It is not likely to be met, but it is a worth while goal.


It is a proposal not a law. It is for discussion & for something to aim for as a goal. Come on men! Really? Is everyone an "idiot" for thinking aggressively, outside of the box, as an inventor, or aiming for a solution to the "global climate change scam" that is already displacing people around the globe. See. The problem with "conservatives" is that anything new is ridiculed & hated. Ask Galileo. Hairstyles included. We have to try new things & cull what doesn't work. Is it all about making money now & fuck the future?Geeeez.

It’s a very radical purposal. If you support it you are also very radical.

@Trajan61 No. I am an "idiot".


The Green New Deal is not her idea. The term was coined in 2007 and had international traction in 2008. See the link which shows how this idea was embraced by the United Nations in 2008.


@F-IM-Forty Why is it stupid? Did you read the link I provided you? The GND is an international effort to incrementally reduce our use of the resources which damage the environment and replace them with environmentally friendly resources. I have read some of your comments on this post. I must say it does not appear to me that you have studied this matter thoroughly. Please see the link I have attached from the US Environmental Protection Agency. It provides a comprehensive look at the major sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the US and proposed ways to ameliorate the situation.



I think it is realistic but a very good aspiration. We sent a man to the moon in 8 years, right? Also, I think that population control would curb the whole driver that causes man's impact of the environment and global warming.


It's only a suggestion from what I've read. But some ideas are better than none in this situation.


I support the idea, but currently it is a dead idea with too many uncaring citizens ruled by the elite they claim so badly to hate.


I support her in that, though I do not know if it is possible. Even if climate change were actually just a bunch of evil scientists faking data trying to improve the world if not for a scrappy band of billionaire oil executives, I could live with that. But the Green New Deal contains a lot of other things, and I'm not sold on all of them, so I don't know if I can say I support it entirely.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:284575
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.