Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
6 Comments
Mordhaussays...http://archive.is/4CVqH
10 year plan. Twice as effective as the USSR's 5 year plans
...Fully rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, restoring our natural ecosystems (needed), dramatically expanding renewable power generation (needed, but it also doesn't mean we should be throwing money away on stupid shit like solar roadways), overhauling our entire transportation system (regional flights, which sort of make up around 70% of total flights, would be targeted for elimination and massively expensive (slower) electrical trains would be put in their place), upgrading all our buildings (most businesses are already moving to green solutions) , jumpstarting US clean manufacturing (see highly expensive and non-competitive with cheaper overseas mfg), transforming US agriculture (forcing a move from cows/pigs/chickens to plant based proteins)...
While we are at it, might as well do the following:
A job with family-sustaining wages, family and medical leave, vacations, and retirement security (Nice, but you can't just make these jobs available. They are supply and demand.)
High-quality education, including higher education and trade schools (Needed)
High-quality health care (Needed)
Clean air and water (Needed)
Healthy food (Subjective, is meat considered healthy?)
Safe, affordable, adequate housing (because this works, ie Projects...)
An economic environment free of monopolies (Technically this exists already, except in countries outside of the USA and EU)
Economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work (SWEET! SIGN ME UP FOR THAT CHECK!!!)
I get that his spiel is comedy based, but the GND is about half reality and half looney tunes.
newtboysays...Fixing and upgrading our crumbling infrastructure could easily create enough of those jobs at least short term, by which I mean one to two decades, to employ every single able bodied American....granted, that's less than 1/3 of us, but would make unemployment rare.
Some countries have tried the free check/minimum income. It turned out to have zero effect on employment, no one decided they shouldn't work and just live on the stipend, it was under $600 a month, but they did find a huge benefit in well being and homelessness.
I don't see a huge difference from social security except age.
That said, I agree, what I've read of this new deal is overreaching pie in the sky dreaming that only made those supporting it seem unrealistic and not serious.
My new deal would trade all these benefits for sterilization after one child. Anyone with two kids pays more and is excluded from benefits, those with 3 or more go to work camps to pay society back for their irresponsibility. Lower the population by 1/2 and solving all these issues becomes exponentially simpler....many solve themselves.
A job with family-sustaining wages, family and medical leave, vacations, and retirement security (Nice, but you can't just make these jobs available. They are supply and demand.)
Economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work (SWEET! SIGN ME UP FOR THAT CHECK!!!)
Mordhaussays...There are some portions of the GND that could work, how well I don't know, but they could in theory. My biggest issue with it, beyond the more ludicrous parts, is that it doesn't allow for reality.
It is very much like the Soviet 5 year plans in that there are a series of grand ideas but when they fail they would just rehash and move on to the next set of ideas. It's kind of like Trump's promises about the border wall.
Any logical person knew that Mexico was never going to pay for it and that it would probably never be built, but there are a fuckton of illogical people out there and logical people are as vulnerable to mob peer pressure as anyone else. He might even win a repeat term because there is still a huge rift between the more logical conservative Dems and the pie in the sky ultra progressives. Hell, in the confusion its even been mentioned on CNN that Hillary might toss her hat in again or try to lend weight to a conservative Dem nominee so as to 'trump' the progressives.
Your idea sounds fair, but I could only see something like that working in a country like China, where the 'incentives' are that you don't get stood against the wall.
Fixing and upgrading our crumbling infrastructure could easily create enough of those jobs at least short term, by which I mean one to two decades, to employ every single able bodied American....granted, that's less than 1/3 of us, but would make unemployment rare.
Some countries have tried the free check/minimum income. It turned out to have zero effect on employment, no one decided they shouldn't work and just live on the stipend, it was under $600 a month, but they did find a huge benefit in well being and homelessness.
I don't see a huge difference from social security except age.
That said, I agree, what I've read of this new deal is overreaching pie in the sky dreaming that only made those supporting it seem unrealistic and not serious.
My new deal would trade all these benefits for sterilization after one child. Anyone with two kids pays more and is excluded from benefits, those with 3 or more go to work camps to pay society back for their irresponsibility. Lower the population by 1/2 and solving all these issues becomes exponentially simpler....many solve themselves.
newtboysays...Oh HELL no. Anyone who accepts her endorsement or worse, her "help" should be run out of the election immediately, don't pass go, don't collect $200. Go away Hillary, you already cost us 4 years of Trump, if you do it again you deserve the lynching you'll receive from his base.
Like many ideas that might have saved the planet, they only stood a chance of working if you removed any choice.
Since that's not the norm in most places, I've understood we are doomed almost since I first heard of over population exceeding the sustainable food production levels, then along came global warming and ocean acidification. I understand that most people today are not capable of long term responsibility....making decisions based on how they effect their great grandchildren. It only took one century of living for today to set up a situation that threatens to destroy the planet. I see less than no hope of staving off disaster, instead of even trying we're firing all rockets at 110% to speed up the process and arguing over possibly turning down the thermostat next year.
its even been mentioned on CNN that Hillary might toss her hat in again or try to lend weight to a conservative Dem nominee so as to 'trump' the progressives.
Your idea sounds fair, but I could only see something like that working in a country like China, where the 'incentives' are that you don't get stood against the wall.
CrushBugsays...*length=7:59
siftbotsays...The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 7:59 - length declared by CrushBug.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.