Skip to comments.Grandiose, Coercive, and Expensive: Democrats' climate-change plans
Posted on 09/08/2019 5:28:19 PM PDT by karpov
Watching the Democratic presidential candidates on CNNs seven-hour town hall on climate change was like attending the shot-put competition at a track meet. It wasnt even a debate because the candidates agreed on most major points. Any sense of competition came in seeing which would offer the most grandiose plans. One after another, each candidate strained to hurl the biggest, most expensive wad of policy proposals as far as humanly possible.
Senator Bernie Sanders set the bar high. We are proposing the largest, most comprehensive program ever presented by any candidate in the history of the United States, he declared. Other candidates didnt want to come up short, offering plans to transform radically fundamental elements of American lifenot just energy, but farming, housing, transportation, and more. No detail was too small. Yes, Senator Kamala Harris admitted, it will be necessary to ban plastic drinking straws to avert climate change.
There were quibbles over some particulars, but, as the New York Times noted, One thing is certain: All of the candidates want to spend money, and lots of it. Former Vice President Joe Bidens plan alone clocks in at a relatively modest $1.7 trillion over 10 years. Senator Cory Booker, meantime, wants to spend $3 trillion. Harris ups the ante to $10 trillion, but Sanders prevails in the spending contest with a $16 trillion plan.
The candidates upfront price tags reflect only part of their proposal costs. Each would subject entire industries to unprecedented levels of federal control, with varied promises to ban fracking and offshore drilling; mandate electrical utilities reliance on wind and solar installations; and restrict so-called factory farming in favor of vaguely defined sustainable farming. In some cases, the candidates said that theyd favor incentives to encourage changes in public behavior.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Well, Socialism is grandiose, coercive...
So we kill our economy while China, Russia, and India do nothing. Effect on climate ZILCH! Stupid bastards.
“Stupid bastard” is exactly what the Marxist wanted from their Cultural Marxist pawns.
Its government control of everything in your life
Consider that all those windmills use large amounts of steel and coal is an essential ingredient in steel production. Ditto coal is essential for making the large amounts of concrete needed for the windmill. Wind turbine blades are made from carbon or glass fibers held together with resins derived from oil. China is also a major manufacturer of solar panels and one of the few sources of rare earth minerals needed for both wind turbines and solar farms. If the US kills its coal and oil industries these raw materials would have to be imported ..most likely from China which has an abysmal record on carbon emissions. So to save a paltry amount of carbon by killing our own economy we will rely on China and other emerging countries like India who will pollute many times more. This is idiocy.
7 hours of the Brawndo debates
equals 170 Billion a year.
350,000,000 American citizens would pay a mere $485 each per year.
A hair under $1,800 for a family of four.
FAmily of 4 = $18,000!!!
I think you dropped a zero.
10^9 v 10^12
1,700 billion $s
For scale, the BBC has reported that there are ~3 trillion trees on the entire planet.
Is there no adult among them?
I wish somebody would ask the idiots proposing doing away with eating beef to eliminate cow flatulence, what is the plan to replace milk.
I heard $20/gallon of gas too. Yes? Anyone?
Misguided, mistaken, misuse, and misanthropic.
Barack Obama said he was good with $4 a gallon gas. Just started going below $2 a gallon in my town.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.