We’re getting more and more details on the so-called Green New Deal, and it keeps being exactly what we thought it would be, a government initiative to make the government bigger, all while the people who subscribe to it fail to make substantive changes in their own lives
‘Green New Deal’ details emerge, as Ocasio-Cortez preps big reveal of WW2-level mobilization
New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Monday unveiled new details on the so-called “Green New Deal” she plans to introduce in a matter of days, as she worked behind-the-scenes to rally congressional support for the proposal that could cost as much as $7 trillion.
Ocasio-Cortez, who is set to unveil the plan with Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey, told her fellow representatives in a letter that the Green New Deal calls for a “national, social, industrial and economic mobilization at a scale not seen since World War II.”
“Next week, we plan to release a resolution that outlines the scope and scale of the Green New Deal,†Ocasio-Cortez said in the letter, adding that the country’s near-total economic transformation should take approximately ten years. (snip)
The Green New Deal proposal would lead to national net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, according to Ocasio-Cortez’s letter, “through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers,†while also generating millions of “good, high-wage jobs.” Details of the letter were first published by Bloomberg.
Through it all, the Green New Deal would additionally “promote justice and equity by preventing current and repairing historic oppression to frontline and vulnerable communities,” according to Ocasio-Cortez.
Sounds less like an “environmental” plan and more like something released by Lenin, Mao, or Stalin.
While there is no legislative text yet available for the Markey/Ocasio-Cortez proposal, a draft circulated by Ocasio-Cortez last week called for a committee to be formed to create a plan, and lays out a framework that includes eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and agriculture, while “dramatically†expanding energy sources to meet 100 percent of power demand through renewable sources.
Which either means massive federal government control over the private sector, control of the food you can eat, control over what can be manufactured, or massive price increases from forcing the private sector to be “carbon neutral” and use unreliable, expensive “renewables.”
To cover what would presumably be a gargantuan cost, 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.â€
That’s a nice, generic way to say that the Government would now be fully in the banking business using your money. Strange how the solutions to ‘climate change’ involve the massive expansion of government, eh?
Not that this has a chance in hell of passing. If it even makes it out of the House (not necessarily a sure thing, as it looks to go too far too fast for the slightly less nutty Nancy Pelosi type Democrats), it will only make it out of committee in the GOP controlled Senate if Mitch McConnell wants a show vote on it.
