ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 มิ.ย. 2019
- What's actually in the Green New Deal?
Become a Video Lab member! bit.ly/video-lab
The Green New Deal is an ambitious plan to fight the effects of climate change. It’s the only American plan that actually acknowledges the size of the impending crisis. And it contains some difficult truths that we might not want to hear.
Read the Green New Deal resolution here: ocasio-cortez.house.gov/sites...
For additional context I recommend this piece by Vox’s Umair Irfan on the United Nations climate report, where the world’s best climatologists tell us how urgent of a problem this is: www.vox.com/2018/10/8/1794883...
This piece from Vox’s David Roberts, shows that world leaders really aren’t taking this urgency seriously. www.vox.com/2016/10/4/1311859...
Finally, you should read this explainer of the Green New Deal, followed by this story (in list form) by Hannah Northey:
www.vox.com/energy-and-enviro...
www.eenews.net/stories/106010...
I also enjoyed this piece, from Kate Aronoff of the Intercept, that imagines a world after the Green New Deal: theintercept.com/2018/12/05/g...
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com.
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H
![[안방1열 풀캠4K] 베이비몬스터 'FOREVER' (BABYMONSTER FullCam)│@SBS Inkigayo 240707](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_2HL-ogzzBU/mqdefault.jpg)
If you want to read about the Green New Deal in the lens of the 2020 election, I recommend this piece explaining Washington Gov. Jay Inslee’s proposal: www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/4/18527458/climate-change-jay-inslee-for-president-2020
Inslee has the most ambitious climate proposals; it is, as Vox's David Roberts writes, the Green New Deal translated into policy.
For more from the rest of the 2020 democratic field, check out the Vox policy guide: www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/23/18304657/vox-guide-2020-democratic-policy-primary#Climate%20change
- Alvin
@Mint Visto They're already 80% gone, and will most likely disappear by 2030 if current trends continue. Unfortunately, it's inevitable at this point.
@Michael Kelleher The civilization we created today in the last 7 or so thousand years requires the climate of the 7 or so thousand years. Climate change moves us out of the climate the Earth has had since the last ice age. That's the problem.
We built our cities, countries and farming industry with the climate we've recently have, in the future it will be different. Which means we can't use historical data to guide decisions. It means farmers may not be able to produce as much food due to possible less viable farmland. It means we will have to rebuild our infrastructure to cope with more storms in those places that we have more people living in. It also means places will be abandoned due us unable to further live there, Look up future of Christmas Island. Don't forget that we humans plan on having more of us on this planet, meaning more will be affected. The negatives from the unknowns of climate change are in fact dunting.
Michael Kelleher its alot more complicated than that. Its not that our climate is changing its that were making that change faster and very likely worse.
The bad thing is that the green new deal isn't going to happen
There is one big flaw in The Green New Deal. It doesn't take on account the most cost-effective and less environmental technology (due to land area use and resources) the Thorium nuclear energy.
"Only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish caught will we realize that we cannot eat money."
-An old Cree Indian proverb
Yes the planet became unlivable, yes our historic city is sunk into the ocean, yes, land that is now under salt water will not be usable for farming for centuries, but for a beautiful moment in time, the shareholders were high!
India and proud 🙂👍
@@randomdude9135 Red Indian, Native American proverb.
@@alisyed6809 Oh, I see.
@@ilmisteriosofranceseradene7548 Antarctic land ice is growing at 58 years per meter and takes 23 milliliters from sea levels annually. This is because while the North Pole grows warmer, the South Pole gets colder. Orbital Forcing. Look it up.
"Sorry, kid, we couldn't save the world, it was too expensive."
Imagine that's what we have to tell the newer generations.
@@Pointyy that's what we will be telling to *our grandchildren*
Karl Kastor Yes I agree. I would rather my tax dollars be spent on unnecessary wars than global warming resolutions
Lmao and then studies come out showing we will lose trillions if we let climate change go through.
ahah short minded people amuse me. It's not about the amount of resources that the deal needs, it's about its sustainability. If only people understood that we haven't moved away from fossil fuels because it's not possible yet
This should be trending on TH-cam, not Kylie Jenner making cookies
Hahaha
Vox will only be trending in Mao's little red book.
!!
Yeah nobody cares about kylie jenner cooking cookies
Never showed up for me, luckily. Greetings from Perú.
Nuclear energy is vastly more efficient and environmentally friendly than most people realize. More energy and less net waste than wind or solar
@@sarahloffler evidence?
Because if we start to use nuclear energy it would mean that more would have increased acces to nuclear weapons. Do you want the cold war to happen all over again??
@@celineatila1279 that's....... Not how that works
Yeah I don’t understand why people don’t want to switch to nuclear.
@@tylerjohnson5110 because of stuff like Chernobyl. So people are just scared of it.
Why are those people, who probably won't live for another +20 years, are still the one that decides the fate of the world?
Underrated comment
Because they have more experience about how things actually work
Would you rather have an inexperienced person be in that position or someone who knows what their doing?
@@TheJuan9-11 or maybe someone that thinks about future generations...
@@SoukainaAmaadour Older doesn't necessarily make you smarter or better. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is only 29, Greta Thunberg 17, Malala Yousafzai 23. They know how things work now, but others may know how it SHOULD work, age means very very little.
It warms my heart to see Americans using Celsius. If mankind can achieve that, we can achieve anything.
CB it is used in science here in the U.S. too, my teacher gets mad if we use Fahrenheit
This is one of the only comments I can agree with in this video.
Comment of the day
Yeah, I don't know why we use Farenheit. It's so confusing Celsius is so much simpler
Farenheight. Murica.
If we took action in the 70's, we wouldn't have to take such drastic action today.
I read an article from as far back as 1911 about this issue.
@@Tadfafty We could have taken baby steps if we started back then. Every project manager knows, a problem that would have cost $1 to fix on day 1, will cost $1,000 to fix on year 1.
@Artin Baller In 1973 FRA built a bunch of nuclear, though largely in response to the oil crisis to help reduce their dependency on fuel imports. They have had pretty much the lowest carbon intensity of the developed nations since.
Other developed countries could easily have done the same to deal with their emissions, it would have been more expensive than coal or gas, but was definitely achievable with the tech available.
we were basically just getting started w recycling in the 70s. you must not know that
We’re not going to take any “drastic action” today. Sorry pal.
This is so sad.
I heard this quote from someone, he said " if we knew that we will fail, whats wrong giving our best shot?" And thats an amazing quote
If you really think human co2 emissions are causing dangerous climate change then you should be able to answer 2 simple questions: what should the concentration of co2 in the atmosphere be and how do we get there?
@Andy P trying to lower co2 output has serious consequences such as : billions wasted on green subsidies. Unreliable energy leading to dying of cold, denying cheap energy to countries desperate to become prosperous. And all this for the myth that our co2 output controlls the climate and that a little warming is dangerous.
@@baronvillanueva8097 I don't know the answer, but the experts do, and they warn us that we need to change fast
@@budomk9299 "the experts say" yeah aight
@VijayKrishna Bajaj YESSS
🙌👏
3:18 “Zero emissions means zero oil business”
USA has left the chat
Except that this year we watched oil prices drop *below* $0 for the first time ... if people were EVER moving away from oil it's now.
K Coup We need to move away from relying on OPEC and instead get oil from Alaska, Texas, and our great country.
Zero emissions means zero business. Means goodbye America’s economy. Hello ignorance.
Was looking for this comment 😂
Also, Russia & the middle east, and let's not get started with Venezuela
HAHAHAHA
This whole ordeal reminds me of finishing a homework assignment 1 day before it’s due
This comment basically sums up the entire situation. We've waited too long. If we put it off anymore we flunk out.
@@amandazmecek except it's with a teacher who says you'll flunk out if you fail this test on ever single test. And nothing happens each time
I think we need a transformative technology that makes the switch orders of magnitude more profitable, this will give us time to develop tech that will transition humanity to the next phase of our social economic development.
More like 15 years after the homework was due.
@@tgreaux5027 not even close... Should have all been done in the 1980s...
Why do the old people that will be gone in next few decades decide what’s good for our future and the new kids being born🤮
My Dad, who was born in 1946, who potentially won't see my children, who is an avid "Trumpist", far right evangelical, is actively doing things that could mean my children can't have a full life on this planet. I'm just hoping if things get too bad, humans can go off planet, rather than our species dying outright. Although we may deserve it.
Because they are alive now and have the experience. Why does a mother feed it's baby? Why does a mother cat feed it's kittens?
Mother Earth doesn’t care about humanity’s excuses, she’ll wipe us off her face, if we don’t get our act together & behave.
So the earth can think?
Mother Earth won’t wipe us off her face, humanity will. Omnicide.
@@rustyshackleton5952 personification is a standard poetic device.
No one asked how we were gonna pay for the last 20 years of war
No one asked how much the US is spending on "deals" to plunder other countries' resources. Because everything, from the invasion, to the overthrow of hostile governments, to the imposition of 'nice' governments, to the taking of resources for the US' 'benefit', all goes through PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. Private corporations, who lobby the government to introduce legislation that will benefit them, because they have the millions and billions, instead of bringing prosperity to the people. Lobbying is no different to bribing elected Congresspeople. The taxpayer money that is spent on ALL OF THIS is too bewildering to even fathom. That's the cost of Pax Americana.
@@KaleunMaender77 What you're describing sounds too much like Obama administration. Thank God Trump isn't wasting taxpayer money like this!
@@suryatallavarjula3184 I hope you're being sarcastic. I really do hope so 😂
👏👏👏👏👏👏
Qrty Li EXACTLY
"Saving the world costs way too much money, afterall I'll be dead soon; therefore this is not my problem and I won't do anything to fix it."
@@Oughbgyj it is do research lol
@@Oughbgyj Do explain. Are you referring to the storage issue or the embodied energy in wind turbines/PV/etc? The latter isn't so much an issue and they're working on the former.
Who is going to pay for it?
@@vivigesso3756 All of us. We either pay to fix things and greatly reduce our carbon output or we do nothing and pay a lot more to try to patch things up as they fall apart.
@@bmay8818 you also have to remember that solar , which is one that's look at most often, isn't as efficient as other sources of energy. Nuclear or Fusion is way more practical for the future, rather than these "Green" sources. Nuclear isn't emitting co2 into our atmosphere, and fusion would bring on a way more powerful source of energy, but isn't looking like it will happen until 2050.
"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The next best time is now."
- Chinese Proverb
We should've implemented these policies ages ago, but we can't put them off any longer.
We didn’t have the technology “ages ago”
@@zachb1706 We could have started the quest back then
I realize humanity only looks forward to the next step, not the step after it.
What? What does that even mean?
To plan the next step after the first step you first have to come up with a first step, then plan the second step. Peace ✌🏻
@@JayDuron-in1hj 😑smh it means humanity looks in the short term not long term
@@mohamedsaid9416
In order to look into the long term you need a short term.
The only downside is having a plan, but stopping there and not planning the next step.
Wait so you're telling me it is up to the american Government? Welp we're screwed
It's up to us to annihilate the American government.
Charlotte E then what?
It's up to the rest of the world. It wouldn't make sense for America alone to make masochistic laws in order to solve a problem that is mostly fueled by non-americans
I was just thinking this... even if the US government completely decarbonizes, how do we get other countries to do the same? Will we ever see the day where 7.5 billion people are on the same page about something?
You know under the GND you won’t be able to travel by air. AOC states in the bill that all air travel will be banned
Everyone was so worried about losing their jobs before. SURPRISE 2020
The dominant discourse of the mainstream environmental movement is about the preservation of our lifestyles by adopting new 'green' technologies. That principle tenet is placed above everything else that the mainstream environmental agencies may claim or actually do. Preserving the very culture and lifestyle which is killing the planet. The crux of the environmental movement today, which is western (and predominantly white) is about the continuation of capitalism and exploitation (i.e using the planet to feed human greed - not addressing the actual needs). Leading environmental organisations, along with scores of scientists and environmental activists actually view the Earth as a resource and not as a living entity. During the last 30 years, the environmental movement has been gradually botched and hijacked by neoliberalism and big-money, manifesting via many new eco-friendly mantras, new technologies and the green new 'deal'. What deal can we as a species make with mother nature?
R Parker but the problem is, if you can’t feed your family now you can’t really think long term.
2020: physechhheeeeeeeeeee
Maybe since ppl already lost jobs we should make new ones related to green energy rather than taking them back to polluting that would be so cool
You've all been deceived... This is not good at all! The UN made "climate change" a crisis through the media they control and then using it to give reason to implement another lie. Lies on lies! Please watch one of my last 4 videos before attacking me with an illogical argument. People need to know the truth. The UN's Agenda 21 2030! All official and scary!
6:34 _"Listen, kid. Saving the world means less money going to the rich and powerful. That's just not an option"_
So why don’t we create more rich and powerful people!?
Is nobody going to talk about how nicely decorated that living room is. I am in love with the warm color pallet
True tho
That senator or congresswomen talking to those kids was just sad
She's a DEMOCRAT SENATOR from CALIFORNIA. You'd seriously think California, of all states, would elect actual progressives. Unbelievable.
@@r0se838 she only cares for gun control, nothing else.
I'm Californian and I'm disappointed she's my senator
@Nicole Ng she is dianne feinstein
"there's no way to pay for it'
Public want's a cleaner future, they say: TOO EXPENSIVE! Corporations need 'quantitative easing' bailout... HERE'S $1.5 TRILLION!!!
Just wait for the consequences. I've already invested in gold so it can be converted into other currency at the value i bought it for. The problem is the left thinks money is unlimited. These trillions in spending will have backlash.
As opposed to $6.6 trillion every year for ten years, not including the social benefits, which is 34% of the US GDP? And even if we get to 0 emmisions in the US that only brings the world down 15% when we need 50%. The best way is a global initiative that eases the way and allows the world to shift away from it by incentiving clean energy, not getting rid of all fossil fuels in 10 years, which is impossible without putting a gun to people's head and destroying the economy, all to not even get enough global emmisions down. Should we do something? Yes. Is the Green New Deal the answer? Unless you want to not even fully solve the problem and destroy the American economy, then no.
Exactly!!
@@Keith_Furtado uhm, that’s ONE country. The cost of doing nothing is much, much worse.
TheGameLab /gaming I didn't say do nothing. Just something that holds the entire world to a similar standard while also not bankrupting the entire nation.
It doesn’t HAVE TO cause pain. It is our choice wether the unemployed and economically obsolete. Social programs, free training & education, and good public services provide basic humanitarian support and serious economic stability.
Seriously, the video focuses on people losing healthcare and having no food. How blind does one have to be to not see that these are also issues on their own, and the healthcare issue is something every single developed country has solved except the US with it's open legalized bribery of politicians
True here. I doubt we agree what programs and training is needed, but the first thing we need is a plan about what we will do, not rhetoric about what must be stopped until we "figure it out"
Imagine having the resources to do it but intentionally to choose not do it. It really just makes me sad how short term thinking our most powerful leaders are
"there's no way to pay for it" last time i checked, we were the richest country in the world...
But thats not your money. You can invest in green technologies and businesses.
We are actually trillions of dollars in debt
Last time I checked the us has 69k debt per capita.
that doesn't mean we can go dropping 100 trillion dollars that America doesn't have they complain about the military budget being to big when it isn't even 1 trillion and they want to spend 100 times that
@@user-mu4ve7xu8t the green new deal isn't 100T
"Economy first before earth" -politicians said.
tribal people and even common folks do what they can to protect and respect their surroundings. Let nature and our ocean rest.
And by the way, according to Al Gore 20 years ago, the Earth was supposed to be underwater in 2019. Currently see a lot of land and a lot of trees out my window at the moment.
@@howardbaxter2514 He never said that. Classic conservative "bUt HoW cAn ThErE bE gLoBaL wArMiNg If I sEe SnOw?!"
@ls7orBust2 not necessarily
@@howardbaxter2514
your comment might be the stupidest and most ignorant in this comment section.
@ls7orBust2 That last thing you said, that doesn't equate to greed. But I get what you mean. Regardless, I'm positive there must be exceptions.
“Sorry kid we couldn’t save the world, it was to expensive” THIS QUOTE INCREDIBLY HURTS ME
@Milo The Dilophosaurus you do realize when the earth is a complete desert earth will exist, however not as an actual ecosystem?
Milo The Dilophosaurus just because the earth will exist until the sun burns out doesn’t mean it’ll still be suitable for life 💀
Milo The Dilophosaurus bud, the earth is gonna last another 7 billion years but we can simply go extinct
Milo The Dilophosaurus you know we can make the earth inhabitable
You want to change the world by radically changing America, what about developing nation's that release more toxic gases and plastics every year than America? Can you force them to do it too?
So no one has seen the Lorax right?
There is absolutely no way that the US can go cold turkey on all of that and give universal health care to all. You can dream all you want, but remember a nightmare is still a dream.
Liberal logic is not quite the brightest, that's a given.
If universal healthcare wasn't tied to employment, it could be done.
The U.S actually spends more per person on healthcare than any other country meaning that universal healthcare could be cheaper than what the U.S has now.
@@vicgamesvt9682 Proof?
@@vibings. plenty of studies
Not caring for climate change costs more than caring for it. Discussion finished. I dont know why so many people are sleeping.
Short term profits over long-term _anything_
@@Bisquick every good business man looks for the long term profit.
Yeah but that short term cost is still very high, if you wanna go through with the GND. Sure it could be cheaper, but nothing is for certain.
@@erenozcilingir5918 Still worth to risk it.
@@enesince6329 I really don't see the long term profit in destroying the earth, and there are plenty of "businessmen", so unless our definition of long term is different I don't see how that's relevant.
Politicians: We can't, is impossible
*The last humans on Earth: No, it's necessary*
Tony Toons technically we’re all the last humans on earth
Man-made climate change is a myth. Liberals just use it as an excuse to advance their political ideology.
Just so you know, every weekend, I go out and cut down a random tree for no reason.
I like to throw in a little trollery at the end of my comments.
i.e. Believe ALL women! ... Except Bill Clinton’s victims.
@@SailorRob whether we take care of the planet or not should not be determined by politics
@@SailorRob Every weekend I go out to get drunk with my friends. But it's cool.
In the beginning of the earth, almost all of the earth's atmosphere was carbon dioxide. It has now decreased to 0.05%.
When carbon dioxide runs out, oxygen can't be produced. Therefore, human beings are exterminated.
What can we gonna do for us?
err...no. Until 200 years ago, it stayed under 300 ppm for 800.000 years or so. In those 200 years, it has risen to above 400 ppm
14 pages is enough to get you laughed out of any graduate level course.
Should've put the green new deal in the description so everyone can read it.
the FAQ too
It's not written. It says that. Watch the video.
That's so they can tell you what it "says"
@@furrmeister it is written. It just doesn't include much.
but then everyone will know that it's a joke
The world ends: "At least people died having a job"
This video misrepresents global warming see as science improves, things become efficient and people’s wealth go up the emissions will slow down
You guys act like the world is gonna end in 20 years. Things like this take thousands to hundreds of thousands of years even millions. We still don't understand what or how the earth operates, it could be a living organism that is healing its own wounds as we speak. It all cones down to what matters now and right now the economy is hurting. In order for this to work we need to stir the pot back up and keep the money flowing to beale to create renewable technology.
@Supreme Emperor Trump just, no. we have a very good idea of how the earth works and we are figuratively killing it.
no you rather have people starve and suffer too? "at least you're alive :D "
@@UltraBlitzer755 you watch too much movies.
The other part of this is that how we do agriculture. Regenerative agriculture can help with carbon capture in a way that reducing burning fossil fuels cannot. It could dramatically improve this. Green capitalism will be excellent for everyone - eventually.
unless you are talking about ocean based agriculture, the changes that could be made are just spitting in the wind. We need to solidify carbon put it bake in the earth. Not our food, or even our farming soils.
Who's watching this right after the Dems got control of the presidency and senate????
Me
Arguably the greatest tragedy of our lifetimes if we don't pull through
BioMutarist arguably?
@@Mr123awesomecoolio for those who may have experienced or will experience something worse
@@biomutarist6832 Something worse than the world coming to an end?
@@FunkingPrink in my personal life I never had any hardships, can't speak for everyone.
Sigh... I'm on your side alright?
So it's the biggest tragedy of our life times then
*I don't get that people don't care about climate change. Even if climate change wouldn't be real, why would it be bad to reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses?*
Because there is a huge cost in completely replacing fossil fuels
We could resemble Venus if all this continues
Trump just wants to be rich.
@@explodethebomb we must face it, no other choices are possible
Trump is not the problem. Humans in general are the problem. We need another plague to get rid of the overpopulation.
I'm a believer. We need to get it together in terms of the environment.
Can’t even trust our own government
But this video telling me to trust other governments 😂
Wake up
Lol exactly they think this new green deal is to save the planet 😒 but they using child slavery trying go green
@@cliftonrogers2237 sir.... What.
@@moriahsheltonfilms lol
Yes because the free Market fixes climate Change so well
@@moriahsheltonfilms sir it be like that
I have a question to All Mankind, especially politicians: *If not now, when?*
when it's to late
thinkabout it’s already too late
Like doing your homework while the teacher is collecting it!
Never basically
Damn fine question. Too bad we'll never find a good answer.
"reckless spending" when the gov wont budge a cent on reducing military spending and the pentagon. america can obviously afford it, but they choose not to.
Military Budget is no where near the cost of the Green new deal. It will cost us over 93 trillion dollars, and the economy will nosedive if we start shutting down those industrys, and it will take many years to recover even with the new jobs the green new deal will bring. Its just not worth it.
RandomActsOfGaming guess what, markets evolve, people find jobs in different fields. It’s not like coal mines respect workers anyways. They would be replaced by machines the second that they exist. If you want to grow corn for the rest of your life be my guest! The Amish have been doing it for centuries and look how advanced they are!
@@Happi-HD it still would be a huge loss for the economy regardless. It's not worth everything that the people will go through.
No America CAN NOT afford it! Reminder the national debt is over 26 Trillion.That's a T there.
HappiHD “people find jobs in different fields” so you’re saying all the lost jobs basically your advice is “just find another job hehehehe good luck”
If I know anything about humanity we'll deny it and keep denying it until it's too late and when it's finally acknowledged the people who knew all along what was happening are going to say
we told you this years ago you did nothing now you will pay for your inaction
Politicians are killing the planet
Nuclear energy...cheaper, reliable, and more environmentally feasible. Find a way to filter/dispose of its waste and say no more.
One proposal does not a plan make
Alan Zhong but it’s a good start
@@lilahesse1774 Um excuse me, but.... Reprocessing, Actinide Burning, Vitrification/ Synroc Conversion, Fast Spectrum Reactors
Nuclear isn't renewable. Cheap to run but not to build. The waste isn't that easy to dispose. When it goes boom, I doubt it would be very environmentally friendly.
Lila Hesse How can you say that Reprocessing and fast Spectrum Reactors have high levels of uncertainty?
so this is how we become extinct huh
No it will just go in human history as a disruptive chapter, in a 1,000 years I mean, long term you should be extremely optimistic but short term yea, panic
don't worry,we replaced the dinos,now we're getting replaced by a new one.
it's the circle of life, hakuna matata
(yeah we're f**ked)
Labib Alwasi Nah we gonna leave this planet uninhabitable
How are we supposed to pay for this, I really want someone who supports this to talk with me in the replies
maybe we could take some funding from the military? the us military’s budget was nearly 1 trillion dollars this year
@@sikena The U.S. military's budget is less than 1% of the cost of the GND. That proposition won't be effective.
@@ComicNote 5%* and that adds up over time.
Guy talking about zero emissions and has a wood burning fireplace in his living room.
Can you please make a video about the HongKong extradition bill??
Markvincent Bonachita Agree Please help us to let more people know about it 🙌🏻
I just wanted to spread what the bill is all about.
YES on video
Yes, especially after the recent riot again
Just a small sign of things to come in 2047
Everyone: we should stop climate change
The same people: *does nothing to assist*
@Asserting Word Ima pollute as much as possible because of this video
Lemmy why
Yep, almost everyone I know does the same.
@tooklongenough omg, I've been waiting to find someone who also thinks this!!!
MC Spaz I guess you could say that it TOOKLONGENOUGH
“Irreversible forever changes that cannot be undone.”
Well yes but no. Once human kind goes extinct, everything will slowly go back to the “old” days.
Until it gets set on fire by the sun….
Before you can even think about a project like this, you need to get money out of politics
As a conservative, I've honestly never considered this issue a priority. But I am beginning to see this is a real problem that the political right really isn't addressing. I still do not agree with much of the left's proposed solutions to this problem (as highlighted in this video), but the more I think about it, the more I realize that a conservative approach is possible. If only all political parties would begin working together on this, I am hopeful we could see some real solutions take place.
Don’t be fooled. They just want to scare people into giving government more control. If you let them run the show, there will be millions of new regulation to limit our freedom!
The Green New Deal is a socialist manifesto disguised as a climate change plan. Most of the document talks about non-environmental social issues. The entire Green New Deal goes into no detail whatsoever on how we would implement any of its solutions, their cost, or even the actual impact on the environment. It's a wish list with no substance, a "plan" devised by people who have no plan but want to seem like they do.
Most people will never read the Green New Deal, but they'll see the catchy title and they'll hear about how we have 12 years before our environment is destroyed. They'll vote out of fear, not realizing that what they're voting for is a Trojan horse for socialist policies that will do nothing for our environment.
@@konigstiger3252 I absolutely agree... I don't think we should give anything over to them. I'm saying I think we should come up with a conservative plan instead. If we can reduce carbon emissions without socialist policies, and I truly believe they can, then they won't be able to hide under the guise of climate change any longer if that's what they're doing.
@@lobsterminion693 I've noticed that about the green New Deal... I support virtually nothing about it. All I'm saying is, there is a free market, minimal government approach possible to reducing carbon emissions. If we implement it, then the last will no longer be able to use climate change as a trojan horse for socialism.
The Republican Party doesn’t care. The right in some other countries care way more, and in some, like Norway, they really care; but the right in the US has a big chunk of politicians that represent the interests of oligarchs (not all). (I edited this)
Original: The right simply doesn’t care. In other countries they might care, and in some, like Norway, they really care. But the right in the US is rigged so it represents the interests of the oligarchs.
Climate Change and Global Warning: **exists**
Rest of the world: **panics**
Russia: Yay more Farmland
Warm water:*Exists*
Russia: *Heavy breathing*
Russia has hacked climate change
Yet their latitude entails fewer hours of daylight than countries at lower latitudes. Thus, biome shifts resulting from climate change will lead to an overall decrease in the earth's "agricultural capabilities".
Yay plague re-emerging from melting permafrost.
@@maxdebruyn9625 You make one fatal mistake there. While it is true that overall a lot of the northern hemisphere gets very few hours of light midwinter, the northernmost part (which would make up around a third of russia i think) would also be seeing way more sun to use midsummer.
However agriculturally it is still a disaster for another reason, the same area is mostly a mountainous craggy landskape with hardly any infrastructure to speak of (as much of russia is) so the argument still stands correct for those reasons.
This is just sad. We humans have dominated the Earth for tens of thousands of years, but it's only in the recent decades where we act like we are the gods of the planet. Why? Simply because we declare ourselves the "smartest creatures on the planet". I can imagine, if there's any Christians, or religious people reading this, that when God created the Earth, and the infinite, ever-expanding universe for us, He didn't think that our freedom of thought would lead to this. We are His creation, but we are also the doom of the universe. Scientists are searching the universe for new Earths that we can migrate to if this Earth dies, but no one seems to see, just why that's so immoral. By looking for a new planet to live on, we are abandoning our current Earth, and acting like it's just collateral damage. Something replaceable. But it's not. That why we need to get our act together, think about what it means if our planet dies, and do something to prevent it. I am a BIG environmentalist, and it pains me to see, and know, that entire governments, full of the most powerful people on the planet, will sit back and do nothing about this world's doom, simply because of money, simply because of inconvenience. Well guess what, life's inconvenient. And lastly, they will sit back and do nothing, because the effects of our actions isn't affecting them... yet. I'm not a violent person. I'm a peaceful, and happy person. But this race, humans in general, makes me sick. The truth, the real world has made me into a negative person in real life, but I smile and put on a happy act. But in my mind, sometimes, I say we make the rich and powerful feel the effects of their actions. I say we make the government feel the effect of their actions.
If you're reading this, then thank you for taking time out of your day to read this whole thing, and I wish you well, and a good rest of your day. Thank you.
How can you FORCE people to pay what they don't have
We Have the money for this without raising taxes on the middle class
@@alexanderishere6205 riiiiiiiight
Sorry, we can’t save the world it’s too out of our budget
Yet they can afford to increase their military.
Your right. America doesn't have the budget to take care of the entire worlds problems. We shouldn't be expected to.
IF this is a serious world problem, shouldn't we be seeing china, Russia and India doing the major lifting? After all China and India are the number 1 and 2 producers of co2 and Russia is rapidly pushing past the US.
THAT is why this is so obviously a scam. The US is the only country in the world to deny we need to reduce co2 for the climate YET we are the only county to surpass the Paris Accord goals, at least with the co2. The only part of the accord we have not followed is the giving of 10 billion American tax dollars to the UN, most of which would have been spent on corrupt officials.
@@itsblitz4437 Sure. Lets stop paying for MORE THAN HALF of the UN's budget. Lets stop funding programs to better 3rd world countries. Lets stop importing foreign goods and instead focus our economic might to solve THE WHOLE WORLD's problem of Global Warming
When you're trillons of dollars in debt, it doesn't fit the budget.
@@sarahsmith7889 A lot of US debt is domestic though
in order to get something, we need to give up something.
And everyone points fingers at who should do it
show us a "progressive" country that has 0 emissions first pls
@@jameslog3431 No-one has that quite yet, but progressive countries have drastically improved. I think there's a map of this somwhere, Google it.
@@kindakay ya so the answer is no
James Log america will be the first
Why do Americans assume that stopping emissions in America is the same as stopping emissions all over the world?
so stopping them here won't make a big dent? Maybe other's will follow suit, but we can mostly control our own emissions 1st
@@dewynn21197 You really think countries like China will follow suit? If anything, America stopping would probably increase emissions in countries like China and places in the middle east as they will now have extra legroom for emissions😭😭
@@farouku5334 no your just wrong the Middle East wouldn’t have anyone to sell to nether would Russia it would pressure China to do the same and other country’s
@@alexanderishere6205 You live in an idealistic world where the US buys all the crude that the middle east and Russia produces. In the real world, the US consumes 20% of global oil supplies and with the rise of emergent economies like India and places in Africa, any reduction in demand by US can easily be compensated for. So YOU are wrong.
Also, the US cannot pressure China to do anything.
@@farouku5334 the richest 10% of the world contributes half of all emissions. Also, the green new deal talks about international support in section N where it discusses sharing innovations and technologies and helping governemnts change their climate policy
The cost of acting on climate change is huge. But the cost of not acting is far, far greater.
climate change is a hoax
Well now I'm depressed
Even if it is not for climate change, just the idea of walking down the street breathing fresh air is nice
You can do that now.
SOLDIER DRUM CHANNEL Right, do it while you can because it’s unsure if we will be able to do it in the future.
being "far fetched" and "imaginative" is soooo much better than sitting here and complaining about how climate change is a problem, the new deal even guarantees jobs for those who will be effected by the shift .-.
Cool. But what is China and India and the entire continent of Africa going to do on their end?
Thats not our problem. By capita, we rank way righer than any of this places in CO2 emissions.
If you want to despair for the future of humanity, watch any TH-cam video that requires some level of education or patience to understand, and then read the comments.
Think for a moment about the level of intellect, knowledge and organization it takes to keep this incredibly complex, infinitely interdependent civilization running. Then read the comments.
We're in for a terminally interesting future.
Sadly, I think you're right. It doesn't take very many fools to destroy everyone else's chances. For every obstructionist, you need 10 people to shove him aside. I don't see those 10 people standing up.
Our society is the most productive, advanced and prosperous in human history. How do you reduce humanity to such a blemish? Have you lost your love of humanity? Self-hate at that level is serious, many have died as a result.
I don't think youtube is a solid representation of human society.
TH-cam is troll town. You need to get out and about and see Americans making America great everyday. Privet businesses, daycares restaurants independent contractors everyone is busy. Stop sitting around worrying about climate change. It's just going to happen. It's cylindrical cycles, it's evolving, your not going to change it. Maybe sell your beach front homes while you can?
@@rubenmborgesmusic There are 2 countries in the world that are currently set to meet the goal of 1.5 degrees of warming. 2 countries.
The more countries that move away from oil, the more countries that will hoard oil and leverage it against everyone else in terms of industrial output.
We have done a great many things but we're going to make this world borderline uninhabitable and we're doing nothing to stop it. If that isn't cause to be pessimistic, I don't know what is.
A Green New deal without nuclear energy may not be feasible.
Nuclear fission is not feasible as well. Requires a shitload of energy to extract and refine the radioactive ore, and generates a bunch waste that is currently useless due to international treaties. Nuclear fusion would be a huge breakthrough, though.
I agree
Nuclear is the future.
@@1000jamesk what? Have you even studied how nuclear energy works? It's the cleanest form of energy we have so far and it generates much less waste than people believe.
@@1000jamesk Peer reviews have indicated that the waste you have mentioned is significantly less than that produced for coal, oil, and any other economical method that we know of currently. Mind the fact that due to a mix of regulations and lack (or inefficient) government intervention certain nations just lead to the lack of funding for nuclear power. Fusion would be a good goal to have, but from a current standpoint, we can no longer rely on waiting for research to push out a break-even as time is ticking. Nuclear energy has had a severe amount of stigma surrounding it, some fears founded with evidence that are addressed, but others are almost plain and deliberate misinformation, thus creating a perception of an ultra-toxic and dangerous cloud of unknowable technology consolidated by the few.
So let me get this straight, in 10 years America is supposed to get rid of all "farting cows", airplanes, oil and gas plants and ALL old buildings and infraestructure WHILE giving universal healthcare and free college.
i switched to celsius a few days ago, and its just so much simpler. i strongly recommend it if youre using fahrenheit.
I strongly agree to this 'plan'. But sadly, all these politicians will never agree to this. To make change we have to suffer, we have to make sacrifices and we have to unite. But then again, not all of us will agree to a certain singular thing. There will never be a common ground. People will just realize to accept this once its too late.
Mostly because this plan doesn't work economically or even scientifically.
@Lei23 yea, I live in SE asia and typhoons are a lot stronger now its extremely terrifying. These politicians will only understand once they are the ones whose actually suffering and experiencing those natural disasters.. btw I feel bad for your allergies
Its also Ironic that most of politicians are old enough to have known and observed the changes yet they fully disagree and not take even a small amount of chance to do it anf support it.
Force them, the planet is to important for consensus
@@gabbar51ngh i agree, real science predicted global warming, but not in correlation with human activity
My two questions are: Where will all the lithium for electric car batteries come from? And how will energy companies cope with the strain of everyone in, for example, America, charging their electric cars at the same times overnight?
Only ~5% of a Li-Ion battery is lithium, and cars could be charged from a house battery charged by renewables or thorium nuclear.
Public transit would likely have to become the dominant mode of transport in an urban environments,where the majority of people live.
Adam Chavez a majority of people? So you’re saying tough luck to those that don’t live in a major city?
Costa Rica science is a cool thing huh? So are you going to dam every river and kill off anadromous fish? Put up wind mills and alter waterfowl flight paths? Educate yourself.
These are all technical challenges we need to address if we want to have a future on our planet, so we better get to work finding their solutions. We have no choice.
Does anyone know where do this guys get their background music?
It's ok people. Politicians will keep their jobs, their mansions and most importantly, their cars and planes. So we can relax knowing that
I’m cool with not paying for foreign oil.
Why?
ANY OIL. or gas.
I know we have our own oil
We are now a net exporter of oil. Cool with that, Jessica?
Jessica Vernon the united states mainly produces it own oil
I still think we should invest way more in nuclear energy.
Fission or Fusion?
So our country could be radiated????
@@eliasziad7864 nuclear energy is actually the safest energy in the world
@@eliasziad7864 you need to do some research on nuclear energy haha
@@rcbiomes7934 If you walk in a nuclear facility with a tiny hole in your hazmat suit, your dead.
I would like to see them make wind turbines and solar panels without oil, coal or gas.
They would use that initially
@@samuelanderson9416 They'll have to use it for a long time unless they are only gonna operate when the sun is out or the wind is blowing.
@@samuelanderson9416 According to researchers at Stanford there are approximately 1.47 million solar panels in use in America. According to Americans for Lightsource it would take about 900,000 solar panels to run a steel mill, more if its integrated. There are 9 integrated mills in America and lots more non integrated. So if we make 10 times more solar panels than currently exist we can make the steel for renewable energy. But you can double that for mining and logistics. The solar farm in Carolina has 5040 solar panels and takes up 4.8 acres so 111,000 acres. That doesnt even include the actual manufacturing facilities to process the raw steel. Where will you put all this? Turning the state of Kansas into a solar farm wouldnt scratch the surface. Solar panel manufacturering is an extremely electricity heavy process. I'm all for green energy but at the moment it's not possible.
@Brick Stone I agree, but the green new deal is specifically against nuclear energy.
Sorry to break the echo chamber, but is this plan even logistically possible? Rebuild every building in America to be energy efficient, get rid of all farting cows, jobs for those unwilling to work, trains faster than planes that can somehow even cross the ocean to get rid of the need for planes among other things. This sounds all nice and fluffy but is it worth destroying the economy with trillions more in debt just in the hope that miners will learn all of the sudden how to operate and build this eco-friendly plan? It's going to need a TON of skilled workers that just aren't there, the demand would be too high. Should we just give money away to people who say they don't want to work like the green new deal says? I think there will be plenty of people wanting free money. Even if all of these things go according to plan in the next ten years, the US accounts for 15% percent of carbon emissions. What are we going to do about the other 85%? Is places like China also going to follow this perfectly along with the rest of the world? I think we should do something about pollution but not in this way. Maybe start using nuclear more or convert the pollution into energy and fuel so we don't have to throw away planes and cars. Just spitballing but definitely not the green new deal.
Ever heard of nuclear energy? It is literally the best form of energy and it is eco friendly as it doesn't emit carbon emissions. Also it makes electricity cheaper so why not use that rather than unreliable solar panels and wind turbines.
... because "scientists"
So removing uranium from the deep ground does not emit a massive amount of CO2? Interesting
However there is still the problem of large amounts of hazardous waste
@@ethanstoehr4420 problem? What the hello are you talking about?! They safely store the nuclear waste underground and seal it off. And also (dont quote me on this as I may be wrong) they sometimes reuse the waste or use it for something else) so your statement is wrong. And the waste is not hazardous as it is dealt with efficiently, unless if in poorer areas
Marco Oh and ya know, removing lithium from the earth to make car batteries for electric cars every seven years is so incredibly efficient
imagine telling the new generation this “sorry grandson we couldn’t safe our planet because it was too expensive”
Good luck getting China and India on board
Imagine the history books telling how the US collapsed from within because climate hysteria
Imagine lying to millions of people just to make money off of people’s fear in really believing we are killing our planet.
There is a forest in northern Siberia that by itself is capable of producing 75 percent of the earths breathable atmosphere, every year. This earth was built with redundancies and self sustaining properties.
Yes we should be better stewards of it, but this green new deal is fear mongering, and nothing more.
SOLDIER DRUM CHANNEL but we are killing our planet lol the ice caps in the north and south pole are melting and the oceans are taking in so much co2 from the atmosphere that it’s warming up and bleaching our coral reefs. yes, the earth was built to be able to regenerate resources and sustain itself but at the same time, there’s just so much it can take. it can’t handle the amount of co2 in the atmosphere and it shows. it’s our responsibility to clean up our earth and take better care of it and not pretend climate change isn’t real because it’s too scary..
@@soldierdrumchannel5710 This earth is also built with positive feedback loops. As the permafrost melts, massive amounts of methane will be released into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 34 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. It is stored inside the permafrost in the form of methane hydrate, and it is estimated that 2,000 to 10,000 gigatons of methane are currently stored. That's an average of 6 trillion tons.
As the oceans get warmer, the solubility of gases in the water decreases, and carbon dioxide and oxygen get released into the atmosphere. This causes more warming, and the lower amounts of oxygen in the water create dead zones.
Higher average temperatures also increase the risk of forest fires, which release more CO2 into the atmosphere, and gradually causes desertification.
Why do people put so much pressure on our government to fix this? If you really care about the environment, then it begins and ends with China imo.
No, this is the issue. It doesn't begin and end with China, It begins and end with the world as a whole. People are so quick to push the blame on a different country. This is a global issue and people need to recognize that. Btw no hate just my opinion.
But what if the first step fails? Hundreds of thousands jobs will be lost with half the country unemployed. No plan?
“Dad Why couldn’t save the world from climate change” Me: “it was too expensive”
"Dad. Why couldn't we save the world from climate change?"
Me: "The Democrats embezzled all the money, instead of using for the infrastructure."
My favorite part of the deal is "make the use of oil, natural gas and coal illegal in the next 10 years" "People who are unwilling to work will still get public support" "Replace all air travel with high speed rails in 10 years" and the plans would cost over 30 trillion dollars. Also China puts out 2 times the amount of co2 America does, China will never pass a law to limit their co2. Sounds nice right?
@@jeffreyhowell3337 yup! ☺️
CheesyMcStuffin you realize China has almost 6 times the population of United States and major factories that literally supports the major companies around the world yet only produce twice the amount of CO2 as United States right?
The people complaining about it are the worst offenders
please do a video on Sudan, make sure people know how urgent this is. we cant sit back and watch as this revolution fails
Patriot Act has an episode on that. Very informative.
So that’s more important as Americans at home go hungry, homelessness is rampant, people can’t get access for healthcare and 9-11 first responders can get medical funding to treat themselves. Yeah but no Sudan yeah let’s all change our Instagram profiles about that cause we feel like we need to be woke about something to feel good about ourselves
@@RecordCheese what? im just seperating the colors from the whites! that line is funny in the worst ways
@Daniel Valente ,you are so right ,you'll see ,ther is gona be a war.
@@OfficialCODman Yeah it is more important at the moment
All counties should work together to get a green new deal seeing as it affects us all
[ referring to McGovern's nomination win, 1972 ]
" The crudeness of the putch was obvious: the 'new politicians ', particularly the younger ones---oozing insolence, smugness, hysterical rush, and big-executive postures ---were intent on shoving the ' old guard ' out in order to demonstrate who's boss . "
-Ayn Rand 1972-
It's only about "we need to take actions"..
When?
No one knows.
Take the action now!
What action?
Selfish Capitalist “I don’t know but we have to do something”
Who should be taking action is the middle class not the government not the upper or lower class the middle class
20 years in the future: "Back then, it was too convenient to give up fossil fuels"
Yes the planet became unlivable, yes our historic city is sunk into the ocean, yes, land that is now under salt water will not be usable for farming for centuries, but for a beautiful moment in time, the shareholders were high!
Man-made climate change was already irrefutably demonstrated by scientists in the 1980s. The people in power have prioritized money and re-election for much more than 20 years.
In the future, the planet will still be here and liberals will be on a new cause.
@Patrick Jensen " if something was actually done against climate change." And what would that something be? Oh, I know. Tax everyone severely.
Burying emissions , planting more trees, more energy recovery, alternators, johnsons theromelectoric energy converter, using hydrogen, geothermal energy, burning waste for energy theres so much more concentrated solar power, algy as a energy source.
It’s a “damned if you don’t, (less) damned if you do” type situation when it comes to employing anti emission masseurs at THIS point.
We slacked off and now we need to deal with the overwhelming backlog.
Man, I wish we could just massage the environment back to health.
We didn't slack off. Our corrupt politicians and fossil fuel lobbyists lied and obfuscated the truth to protect their profits.
Big Red Oh I’m not denying that. In fact, I want to punch then kick every single Republican in the stomach for that exact reason. What I did there was refer to the whole human race collectively. Because when historians will be looking back at these time, they won’t be seeming individuals at work (i.e. people protesting and politicians lying), but they will most likely look at the actions of the whole society.
P.S.: My deepest sexual fantasy is a scenario where Bob Marry has to watch his whole business collapse.
buT WhaT aBouT tEh CowS? anD aIrplANes?
Muh hamburgers muh planes
a fair question for people living in Hawaii
@@brianpdavis07 I guess you didn't get the sarcasm. Nowhere in the GND indicates anything about getting rid of airplanes. Read it. It's only 14 pages with triple spaced font.
@@osheaness But they will have to be put into a hault as well due to removing emissions.
@@ozanemekter2693 Removing the Cow industry would ultimately remove jobs that many can not afford to lose
I'm not surprised. America is hesitant to move from Farhenheit.
Why do you expect them to move from fossil fuel to renewable energy?
Is there a update to this video or do you like to give unupdated information out on the web bc I know the green new deal is now upwards of 40 pages
This is really informative and interesting. I know it angers most the cost of such a dramatic shift but I think of it as a pay $5 now instead of pay $20 later.
if you think co2 is a problem, you failed basic science class
@@gregoryeverson741 That's like saying that because salt is important for our bodies, the amount of salt consumed doesn't matter. Yes, CO2 is important. But beyond a certain limit, it does become a problem. A very dangerous problem.
Gregory Everson water is good therefore floods are better
@@gregoryeverson741 if you denounce co2 of being capable of becoming a problem based on its concentration in the atmosphere, you haven't used your basic science classes enough to evaluate your opinion.
Trillions a year to western govt, dramatically increasing energy cost is just a couple things to add to your $5.
Only 14 pages? I'd like to read that.. oh look it's in the description!
Right?!
Electric cars are only green if the energy source of the electricity is green, which means generating all electricity through renewables, which is impossible. Fingers crossed for fusion.
We need more than just 14 pages. If it has been around since 2007, why is it just two steps?
I feel like this is just a political stunt.
While it scares me that we as a species will suffer for a long time I’m also glad that people are doing everything they can to save the world. Those are true heroes
China: we produce 2/3rds of the world’s carbon emissions. you like?
everyone else: no
China: well to bad
Lmao , india have world record for planting trees . But i think that is not enough
@nuwdo China is doing stuff, India is under developed and U.S is doing nothing
Its not just the USA that has to find a solution. Every single county has to take action.
yeah this did seem extremely America-centric, almost forgetting about all the other countries in the world.
@@zxh8388 uh because it's an american policy proposal (or really a framework for a future set of proposals). should AOC be writing policy papers for Poland?
@@alquinn8576 Why not? You people have no problem writing policy for Iraq or Afghanistan 😂
America needs to make some major changes considering that it is one of the world's top polluters as well as the only major superpower that isn't following the Paris Accord
If the US did its part, the global temperature would lower by a meager 0.03 degrees Celsius, I believe.
Remember that most of this has less to do with climate change and more to helping there business helpers.
So… to these people my life, our lives, our future… it’s too expensive?