|
|
|
|
|
|
by matthewdgreen
2398 days ago
|
|
|
The logic behind the GND is simple: if we don’t do something about this, we’re going to be screwed. People don’t want to do anything about it because they’re afraid it will cost jobs. So make a plan that guarantees them jobs if they do something about it. It’s a political solution to a technical problem. You may not like the politics, but it’s pretty damn logical. |
|
|
> The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” Chakrabarti said to Inslee’s climate director, Sam Ricketts, according to a Washington Post reporter who attended the meeting for a profile published Wednesday.
> “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” he added.
The question is whether there is a logic to it beyond the pretext that motivated it originally. And I don’t think there is. Protecting jobs from displacement as a result of climate change mitigation efforts makes sense. That could be accomplished for a fraction of the price of offering guaranteed housing, jobs, healthcare, higher education, etc.
We are talking about spending trillions a year on social welfare to get maybe $100 billion (at most?) on climate change mitigation. Is that “pretty damn logical?”?)