DTEJD1997 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 Hey all: I've seen plenty of criticism for the "Green New Deal"...but I think most of it is foolish and misplaced. Specifically, most of the criticisms focus on it's price tag. Arguing that it's cost is too high is misplaced. The argument against it should be that it is murderous policy and that tens of millions will starve. Fortunately, I am not the only one starting to point this out. One of the founders of GreenPeace is voicing similar criticisms. Please see: https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/31465-green-new-deal-would-kill-almost-everyone-warns-greenpeace-co-founder Among the many problems of the "Green New Deal" is that it aims to completely get rid of internal combustion engines (ICE). OK, now what? How are you going to have widespread food distribution? Battery powered trucks? Electric trains? OK, fair enough...but you won't have enough, not even close. There is also talk that electric trucks won't work out as the batteries needed simply grow too large in relation to the amount of cargo that can be hauled. So food distribution would definitely go down, perhaps by a tremendous amount. Take a step back though. How are we going to plant/harvest the food in the first place? A battery powered tractor pulling a plow? Don't think that is going to work...battery weight will either be too large, OR you are not going to get enough "juice" to plow a field...or maybe you are changing batteries after every few rows? Same thing with combines. Even if batteries and their weight was NOT a problem, how are you going to charge all of them if you get rid of oil, coal, nuclear, natural gas electric plants? Wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro is simply NOT going to provide enough power not even close. How are you going to get international trade shipments? Remember, no ICE. Also, no nuclear powered ships. So that leaves wind powered ships. Back in the 1700's and early 1800's this is exactly what humans did...but I would think international trade goes down by a MINIMUM of 90%, we simply won't be able to build enough sailing ships. Also, how many sailing ships to carry the same amount on a containership? 10, 25, 100, more? Air freight & travel will also be incredibly restricted. Nuclear planes? NO WAY. So that leaves blimps & zeppelins. Air travel/freight goes down by 90%+ Finally, let us say the USA implements this....what of other countries? No more tanks, humvees, aircraft carriers, subs. Honduras could easily invade & take us over! So food production plummets, trade collapses, military is ineffectual. 80%+ of the population's job is simply to scrounge up enough to eat. That is your new job. Of course, a dramatic population reduction is probably what is wanted by the proponents of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.