2020 Democratic presidential primary

WASHINGTON — Senator Bernie Sanders on Thursday released a $16.3 trillion blueprint to fight climate change, the latest and most expensive proposal from the field of Democratic presidential candidates aimed at reining in planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Mr. Sanders unveiled his proposal one day after Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington, who made climate change the central focus of his campaign, announced he was dropping out of the 2020 race. Mr. Inslee’s absence could create an opening for another presidential aspirant to seize the mantle of “climate candidate.”

Mr. Sanders was an early supporter of the Green New Deal, an ambitious but nonbinding congressional plan for tackling global warming and economic inequality. He is bestowing that same name upon his new plan, which calls for the United States to eliminate fossil fuel use by 2050.

It declares climate change a national emergency; envisions building new solar, wind and geothermal power sources across the country; and commits $200 billion to help poor nations cope with climate change.

...Mr. Sanders’s plan would be funded in part by imposing new fees and taxes on the fossil fuel industry. He described the proposal as putting “meat on the bones” of the Green New Deal resolution and laying the groundwork for a rapid energy transformation.

...Though the Vermont lawmaker was an early proponent of a carbon tax — he once called it “the most straightforward and efficient strategy for quickly reducing greenhouse gas emissions” — his new proposal makes no mention of one.

Instead, he calls for converting the electricity and transportation sectors to 100 percent renewable energy by 2030 and achieving “complete decarbonization” by 2050 through a massive spending plan.

nytimes.com/2019/08/22/climate/bernie-sanders-climate-change.html

Sounds great to me, though of course you can count on the New York Times to emphasize how expensive this proposal to save our collective asses is in the very first sentence of their article.

converting the electricity and transportation sectors to 100 percent renewable energy by 2030

a laudable goal

completely unrealistic but hey, shoot high says I

Yeah, but that dollar figure is important for people who care about it, too - it demonstrates that the scale of the plan is beginning to approach the scale of the problem

xp

"beginning to approach"

still waiting for that $100 trillion proposal

We’ll get there eventually, proactively or not

With continued growth in emissions at historic rates, annual losses in some economic sectors are projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century—more than the current gross domestic product (GDP) of many U.S. states

just tbc "hundreds of billions" != 1 trillion and the US economy by comparison to this plan is about $20t large

If it's Biden I think he takes Harris. If it's Warren, a two-woman ticket doesn't fly. You need a minority, so take Castro. He's talented, young enough not to stab you in the back, and he's happy to be your son of a bitch.

— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) August 21, 2019

biden in 2008

Pop quiz: Which 2020 Democratic candidate said this about the future of health insurance? pic.twitter.com/9hCPzk5yYV

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) August 22, 2019

tbc "hundreds of billions" != 1 trillion and the US economy by comparison to this plan is about $20t large

Tbc, the value of the global ecosystem far exceeds $20 trillion.

just tbc "hundreds of billions" != 1 trillion and the US economy by comparison to this plan is about $20t large

That’s hundreds of billions of annual losses in some sectors alone, not hundreds of billions overall. That’s why I billed those parts above. The same report i linked to projects 10% annual loss to the entire us economy. All that adds up to a lot more than $50 trillion

projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century

lol society as we know it is not going to exist by the end of the century

Tbc, the value of the global ecosystem far exceeds $20 trillion.

the global ecosystem is priceless. unless you subscribe to MMT you have to imagine what dedicating about 80% of our economy to this issue would look like. it would take massive governmental involvement in almost every industry of this country on a level that greatly surpassed central control during WW2. in some ways it would really be backdoor communism - a way to nationalize 80% of our economic activity. it would also be ongoing + permanent- there would be no environmental surrender where we would begin to deconstruct the wartime economy. compare this to islee's deal which was a 9t dollar plan (still immense) or warren's which is 2t. i'm sure some ppl would find this very appealing and i don't think it's lost on sanders that this is a way he could potentially remake the entire economy + politics of this country. for me it's a nonstarter tho. i am in favor of massive spending to address climate change - even much higher than what warren is proposing.

* (i'm very happy to hear why i'm wrong btw and it is not as radical a plan as it seems - i'm not an economic expert and i could be missing something.)

Mordy, where are you getting this 80% figure from?

our GDP is 20t the plan is 16t = 80%

So, you want to take an amount to be allocated over the next 30 years and spend it all in the first year?

btw that's new spending - the gov already makes up a large % of our national economy that this would be added to

I appreciate the urgency but I don't think that matches Sanders' implementation plan

tbc it's a ten year plan and yes i'd imagine much of it would be upfront since he expects it to pay for itself within 15 years

Of course the DNC doesn't want debate about climate change. Their donors are still decorating their apocalypse bunkers, and this takes away from that.

— Dennis Perrin (@DennisThePerrin) August 22, 2019

This has gone on long enough. https://t.co/KvspBPzwyN

— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) August 21, 2019

wow a twofer

there should be a thread for Dennis Perrin tweets

i think it's the OUATIH thread

can we have @DennisThePerrin hatcatted?

^^^^

Replace with Socks the cat for maximum trolling

Guys? Fuck off.

why

Phil Collins

I support that suggestion

I suspect you faggots* will actually do this, so that's my last post of that type.

*in the oldschool nonwoke sense

Mordy, where are you getting this 80% figure from?

― Karl Malone, Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:54 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

our GDP is 20t the plan is 16t = 80%

― Mordy, Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:55 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

So, you want to take an amount to be allocated over the next 30 years and spend it all in the first year?

― brigadier pudding (DJP), Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:57 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

btw that's new spending - the gov already makes up a large % of our national economy that this would be added to

― Mordy, Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:57 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

I appreciate the urgency but I don't think that matches Sanders' implementation plan

― brigadier pudding (DJP), Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:57 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

tbc it's a ten year plan and yes i'd imagine much of it would be upfront since he expects it to pay for itself within 15 years

― Mordy, Thursday, August 22, 2019 4:00 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

just because no one followed up on this...

it's a $16 trillion plan, over 10 years. that's $1.6T a year. assuming a $20T/year economy, that's 8%, not 80%. yes, that's still a lot. (also, if he somehow got elected and congress somehow decided to try to pass this bill, $16 trillion would be the starting point that would inevitably be reduced substantially.)

here's how the plan - https://berniesanders.com/issues/the-green-new-deal/ - says that it will pay for itself within 15 years:

This plan will pay for itself over 15 years. Experts have scored the plan and its economic effects. We will pay for the massive investment we need to reverse the climate crisis by:

• Making the fossil fuel industry pay for their pollution, through litigation, fees, and taxes, and eliminating federal fossil fuel subsidies.
• Generating revenue from the wholesale of energy produced by the regional Power Marketing Authorities. Revenues will be collected from 2023-2035, and after 2035 electricity will be virtually free, aside from operations and maintenance costs.
• Scaling back military spending on maintaining global oil dependence.
• Collecting new income tax revenue from the 20 million new jobs created by the plan.
• Reduced need for federal and state safety net spending due to the creation of millions of good-paying, unionized jobs.
• Making the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share.

Mr. Sanders’s campaign estimated that roughly $3.1 trillion would be generated from “making the fossil fuel industry pay for their pollution” through new but unspecified fees and eliminating $15 billion in annual subsidies; another $1.2 trillion would come from “scaling back military spending on the global oil supply,” and $2.3 trillion would be collected from new income tax revenues from new jobs in the renewable energy industry, among other measures.

so people can and will quibble with how this would pay for itself, but let's not emulate rightwing talk radio and start saying that the plan would cost 80% of the US national economy and that it's all going to be spent in a few years, before we even read the fucking plan

also, the cost of a new stealth bomber is $46 trillion, according to leftwing talk radio

If one major mistake of Waxman-Markey was its backers’ inability to articulate how that climate bill would make people’s lives easier, the Green New Deal framework operates by constantly delivering and broadcasting tangible quality of life improvements, using early victories as an opportunity to enlist more support among the many, many people needed to challenge the colossal power of the fossil fuel executives, who are going to put up a massive fight one way or another. Sanders’s Green New Deal offers voters a vision of how much better the world could be without them; its policy and its politics aren’t unrelated.

https://theintercept.com/2019/08/22/bernie-sanders-climate-policy/

It might be worth noting that money spent does not disappear, but re-enters the economy, where it continues to circulate. Also worth noting that interest rates are still remarkably low in terms of the past 50 years, and if the Fed can purchase more than a trillion dollars of worthless paper to clean up the balance sheets of big banks and insurance companies after they screwed the pooch in 2008, it could monetize some of the US debt required to pursue such a plan by purchasing some of the US Treasury bonds that would be issued.

Just some minor considerations.

sorry, one more long excerpt, because fuck yeah on this

Using an old playbook, Republicans will liken any plan to curb emissions at all — be it a revenue-neutral carbon tax or a fuel efficiency standard — to socialism. Sanders’s plan doesn’t dance around the fact that the government will indeed play a more active role in the economy — or that most people’s lives will be better off for it.

Rather than inviting fossil fuel interests to the negotiating table, Sanders targets them as enemy number one. There are practical as well as political reasons not to enlist the likes of ExxonMobil in the transition to a low-carbon economy: Their core business model — to dig up and burn as much coal, oil and gas as possible — has not changed, and is plainly incompatible with decarbonizing along the timeline science is saying is necessary to avoid catastrophe. In addition to banning fracking, mountaintop removal coal mining, and extraction on public lands, Sanders plans to “[p]rosecute and sue the fossil fuel industry for the damage it has caused,” making particular reference to revelations in the last several years that Exxon funded climate disinformation while knowing full well the damage warming posed. “These corporations and their executives should not get away with hiding the truth from the American people. They should also pay damages for the destruction they have knowingly caused,” the plan states. On this point, Sanders’s plan is more confrontational than Ocasio-Cortez and Markey’s Green New Deal resolution, which doesn’t mention fossil fuels.

so fucking glad to finally see a major candidate lay it out like this. "he says what i'm thinking!!"

Tremendous, thanks for the excerpts

Reduced need for federal and state safety net spending due to the creation of millions of good-paying, unionized jobs.
Making the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share.

Canadians can't get even carbon pricing to fuckin exists and not only this dude is promising that a 1.63 trillion plan will pay for itself but he thinks the nation that voted twice for climate deniers in the last 12 years will buy it. Is it the desperation that is such good marketing or really no one has a calculator in their hands? Scaling aback in military spending? If you scale back 20% of military spending, you save a whooping a .12 trillion. You capture 15% of all revenues from oil producing companies? You save a whooping .35 t.

Green New Deal is the only forward, fine. But it's going to cost a lot to each individual citizen. Let's stop denying this. So either Bernie ascribe to voodoo economics and think the Fed can print as much money as they want and use taxes only as a deflation tool which is absolutely nuts, you can ask Argentinians how they are going to pay their debts in foreign currency over the next few years, or Bernie just does not have the guts to say 'it is time Americans become a society in which individuals pay taxes like other high-HDI nations' and stop with the abhorrent lying.

you can ask Argentinians how they are going to pay their debts in foreign currency over the next few years

Not to say that we have been very responsible or deserving of the distinction lately, but the US dollar is the world's foremost reserve currency and therefore in a highly privileged position compared to the Argentine peso. Earning foreign currency to pay off debts is not really a problem here.

The US currency is in this very deserving position because the whole world trusts that it won’t inflate. Print tons of it and that trust is long gone and we find yourself in a shitty situation for lots of economies around the world.

We find ourselves**

Is it the desperation that is such good marketing or really no one has a calculator in their hands? Scaling aback in military spending? If you scale back 20% of military spending, you save a whooping a .12 trillion. You capture 15% of all revenues from oil producing companies? You save a whooping .35 t.

no, it's a whooping $1.2 trillion for the military cuts, and a pooping $3.1 trillion from the fuck you fossil fuel fee

Mr. Sanders’s campaign estimated that roughly $3.1 trillion would be generated from “making the fossil fuel industry pay for their pollution” through new but unspecified fees and eliminating $15 billion in annual subsidies; another $1.2 trillion would come from “scaling back military spending on the global oil supply,” and $2.3 trillion would be collected from new income tax revenues from new jobs in the renewable energy industry, among other measures.

For most of the past decade the Fed has been having considerable trouble getting inflation up to their own target of 2% annually. We would seem to have some leeway before we get to hyperinflation destroying the US economy.

I'd much rather frontrunners advance too-ambitious plans that actually address issues in a way that is commensurate with the scale of the problems than bury their heads in the sand and throw out quarter-measures. At worst, it potentially helps to shift the discourse. If even one-twentieth of the measures in Bernie's plan were actually put in place it would be a tremendous benefit to many.

I would want the same from the Canadian left, incidentally.

I would love some more inflation, ffs

the same way pelosi and biden are haunted by reagan, bankers/economists are haunted by 70s inflation. those who remember it will be gone soon