Home | About | Donate

Could a Green New Deal Save Civilization?

#21

An atmosphere low in carbon and high in oxygen is the result of biological evolution. All humans are doing by dumping carbon in the atmosphere is putting the carbon where it originally was, before biology took it out of the atmosphere when vegetation evolved. Biology, purely by chance, evolved species that removed carbon from the air and then, purely by chance, evolved a species that is restoring the carbon to where it used to be.
The question isn’t whether civilization can be saved. The question is whether Hot Earth will allow biology to continue to evolve, or Earth will be an oven like Venus. That is unclear.

#22

He’s that devious, but I don’t think he is smart enough.
By the way, that is the first time I heard the quote, “We have a world to run.” Was that in his inaugural?

#23

What are the choices here. We would need to kill off an extra 9,000 or so people per hour globally. Maybe we could come to that zero growth position if we had starvation, plague, and war all going full speed at the same time continuously. But how much fun is that? Better off with another flood.
Lottery for a seat in the ark?

1 Like
#24

“Could a green new deal save civilization?”

To paraphrase Ghandi, “civilization would be a good idea.” Not sure if what passes for “civilization” these days is really worth saving, but, sure, I suppose a green new deal could “save” us. More likely is that the sixth extinction will collapse “civilization,” and evolution will turn and turn again. Maybe some H. sapiens will survive; maybe not. Evolution doesn’t care and, on that scale, it doesn’t matter much to me, either. Regardless, it’s pretty much out of our hands at this point.

2 Likes
#25

Taxing the rich is a good first step. But I would like to see taxing not only income but wealth, i.e. take excessive wealth away through draconian inheritance tax policies.

2 Likes
#26

Sure, it’s not perfect. It’s too little, too late. But let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. There’s always the possibility that we can build upon the Green New Deal, that the green movement will expand and accelerate, once people who are not yet all-in with divorcing carbon right begin to see the benefits of doing it. And there WILL be benefits.

1 Like
#27

There is an assumption that the FDR New Deal succeeded? Did it? Or was it the mobilization of industry to provide for and wage a global world war?

“The New Deal programs did not end the Depression. It was the growing storm clouds in Europe, American aid to the Allies, and ultimately, U.S. entry into World War II after the bombing of Pearl Harbor that revitalized the nation’s economy.”
https://memory.loc.gov/ammem/aaohtml/exhibit/aopart8.html

We have to do away with the entire edifice of capitalism if we have any chance of mitigating and reversing the impact of climate change. But a Green New Deal persists in tinkering around the edges of the economic system that depends on expansion and cost-cutting.

2 Likes
#28

Dr. Tim Garrett through economic physics places a price on all economic activity of 10 milliwatts for each 1990 dollar of economic activity. Look at someone’s expenses and you can see their contribution to climate change.
Look at any national economy and see the contribution of that economy to climate change.
The cost of those solar panels and wind turbines will be their contribution to climate change.
With a guaranteed individual income, a basic individual contribution to climate change is established.
Look at any area of expenditure and see that area’s contribution to climate change. The U.S. military, being the U.S.'s largest area of expenditure is the U.S.'s largest contributor to climate change.
Add it all up and compare it to the amount of energy that can be removed from the atmosphere by biological processes and you have our over expenditure, and a deteriorating biosphere.

1 Like
#29

Wow. You hit that nail square on the head. Good comment.

#30

The green deals need to be worldwide. Paris was a start but the movement needs to be bigger. Everything happening in the world affects and is affected by what is looming in the new future.

The US needs someone with a voice as strong as AOC in the UN, and it needs to say: stop war and live green.

1 Like
#31

As it stands now the decision-making apparatus, maximization of “economic” activity, will not suffer any genuine reform such as a “Green New Deal”. WiseOwl

This is true, but media and propaganda would splinter a “revolt” in a thousand directions. Even if a green new deal were to be understood as pressing…real pressing…whose ideas would people trust to implement? McKibbon’s…I suppose, my group anyway. But some want to shoot sulfates into the upper atmosphere to reflect sunlight. First thing you know, Erik Prince and Haliburton would want a piece of the action! I think the talk in general on message boards and facebook is too theoretical.

BTW, I loved to hear Mollison talk.

I did, though, share your comment on facebook, because you make an important point. With which I disagree a little. I’ll relate here what I put above it…

Profit will have to be made while Green New Deal gets converts. But if we don’t move neoliberalism toward Green New Deal all the while, there will never come a point where it will synch-in.

So we work on this

#32

Society will spend much of its time in future years simply trying to maintain some semblance of current lifestyles. That will be the job growth engine (Green New Deal).

#33

Back when the rich were taxed at 90% they could not immediately hide their wealth half a world away with a few keystrokes or a phone call.
Most of their wealth is not defined as income in any event, and often avid taxation all together.
Would imagine that the majority of any real assets like gold, gems, silver etc is probably squirreled away in unregistered vaults no government is even aware of.
As always it is about power, and under the current paradigm the people have none.
They will fight tooth and nail against any tax reform. Not because they will loose any of their wealth (they wont), but because a strong middle class is a workforce that will eventually become harder to exploit and oppress.

1 Like