Rethinking The Green New Deal | Intellections

The Green New Deal’s promises for revising energy policy come at an unprecedented cost. There are less disruptive methods of reducing greenhouse gases, such as a revenue-neutral carbon tax. By making the price of fossil fuels better reflect their negative side effects, carbon taxes would give consumers more of a reason to buy low-carbon alternatives.

Additional resources:

[elietheprof]

A billion electric cars would be even worse than a billion gas cars. What we really need is to make our neighborhoods more walkable, so we don't have to drive so much in the first place.

[michaelwu]

The fact that we are already past disastrous levels of projected temperature rise (according to climate scientists) means that we need radical change now. The economy is important; people’s jobs and businesses are on the line, but the bottom line is that we have to act NOW. Thank you for the video; it makes many good points, but these incentives and policies should’ve been implemented 20 years ago. Now it’s too late to let the free market do it’s thing unfortunately. We need swift and immediate action or MILLIONS of people in the developing world are going to die in the upcoming years due to famine, natural disasters, and armed conflict.

[ozmarichardson]

Thanks for telling me what to think oh benevolent advertisers who have surely paid all this money to produce an add promoting nuclear energy, because they're just nice people. I know there's no way you're lying to me to get more money for yourselves. When has anybody ever done that?

[Alexander]

It promises to do those things, and how often is a politician's promise worth anything?

[Wookey.]

You are absolutely right that a (sufficiently high) carbon tax is the most efficient way to decarbonise the economy. The only problem is that the people who claim to be in favour of market-based solutions vote them down every time they are suggested. So sure - get everyone to choose whether they want carbon taxes or a green new deal, but currently we are getting neither, and that just leads to disaster. I don't care which way it gets dealt with, I just want it dealt with. And 20 years of dissembling on the issue has made it much more expensive and difficult to deal with than it needed to be. The right, gently-ramping policies put in a decade or two ago and we'd all barely notice the changes. (See the UK carbon floor price, which has removed coal almost entirely in a decade with no drama). We could have had that stuff everywhere...

[abramgruswitz]

Who wrote this? The CATO Institute? This is ridiculous!

[Jrookus]

Just do nuclear. Nuclear power is more efficient, it’s clean, it’s cost effective, it’s maintenance now is easier than ever, it’s safe, and it produces significantly more power than all other competitors (even oil)

[johndanger]

America could just go back to gold standard. Rip up credit card and live within means. Has anyone ever correlated debt spending with carbon gas emissions?

[bernardomercado]

I mean have you literally read the Idk if you have it mentions a lot more, and if the climate crisis is as close to our current time as we believe, then well, we sorta need it

[lordtachanka]

Electric cars are terrible for the environment. How long do you think it takes batteries to decompose? And how expensive they are?

[matthewlee]

You say people will lose jobs from the Green New Deal without mentioning how it creates 20 million union jobs. Not to mention we've tried to have market solutions for climate change and the market resists. Nor is a market response (like a carbon tax) going to transition us quickly enough to carbon neutrality. This is why the GND is the standard bearer of climate policy

[olliegooding]

I find it shocking that PolicyEd, which purports to be educating the American people about policy, is taking such a clearly political line on this. The politics and economics of solving climate change are inherently linked, and staunchly advocating for a carbon tax over government spending is a political, not an economic stance.

[sats]

carbon tax will only raise the cost of living and force people to use alternative forms of energy that do not keep up with demand

there needs to be something that can truly replace fossil fuels (nuclear would be a good start) instead of pretending that horse is better than the car

[steves]

Electric cars get their energy from wherever you plug them in does.

They sound good but are they really?

[SonPhamThai]

Summary: Socialism, More Welfare, Unemployment, Dictatorship GND.

[danielworden]

So a mouse gets locked in a jar and dies sad.anuther mouse get locked in a jar with a plant and they both live .so where on a planet with trees and lots of them oh and vegetables lots of these .ahuh what's up doc.ive got a catalyst on my car that cleaned the air .im all green man I'm doing my share of exhaling to grow vegetables .im clean what me worry .electric cars are non polluting there's no such a thing .coal burns to make electricity see and all this as chemicals in those battery's are bad for the earth see. 🌎

[bluebloom]

Maybe I dunno if we taxed the billionaires we could do the perfectly fine?