KyussB wrote: » The poster was asking about the Green New Deal, the GND provides a Job Guarantee...already answered.
KyussB wrote: » The core dividing line separating people open to concepts like the Green New Deal, and those who are not, is the need for massive government-led investment and direct economic activity (significantly boosting the proportion of GDP controlled/generated by the government, and the governments influence over the private economy). Our contribution to climate change will not be solved quickly, without that - because (at the scale of individual businesses/industries) it is inherently unprofitable to solve it, and especially to solve it quickly (by e.g. 2030) - which makes it an impossible job for private industry. Those opposing the GND, oppose it primarily due to inherent ideological opposition to governments having that strong of a role in the economy - even temporarily - and this sets the course for all discussions such posters have on the GND (effectively, they argue from the predetermined conclusion that government involvement = bad, and won't actually be arguing the merits of the policy - just try to push the narrative to their predefined conclusiion, pretty much the same as with climate science as a topic in general itself).
KyussB wrote: » The people administering the Job Guarantee. There is already loads of work which isn't profitable, yet is done dor the social good - that's usually the whole point of governments, since they are the only economic entity that can run without a profit - stuff like providing public transport to areas that make a loss, most major infrastructure/capital projects make a loss to benefit the private economy (all those motorways...), the health servicse run at a loss for the good of society etc. etc.. Providing work that is socially beneficial yet not profitable is not 'bollix' - much of it is essential to society. The Job Guarantee isn't for permanent jobs, though (it can be used that way but isn't its main purpose) - it's for temporary employment during economic downturns - people move out of the JG back into the private economy, as the economy recovers. It will have public works programs alongside it, for work on infrastructue, R&D, and e.g. energy efficiency (retrofitting buildings etc.) work, while there is a climate emergency, as well.
ThunbergsAreGo wrote: » So the Green New Deal will not provide jobs for those in the Midlands but might provide temporary employment in roles deemed important by our overlords
KyussB wrote: » Since that question has such a trivially blindingly obvious answer (you've discussed the GND with me plenty of times before, and eveyone who's read about it knows it's a government operated program), I take it that it's intended to be facetious or something? Much like the questions in your previous post - and much like the weird sequence of posts involving an accusation of being a Stalinist, coupled with weird dancing videos, and a threadban... I'm just going to take it that you're trying to waste my time.
KyussB wrote: » You supposedly didn't even know who was going to administer it a minute ago - now you are certain it has the full breadth and structure of a Stalinist command economy. The Green New Deal has no relation to a Command Economy. It directly relates to our economies of today - of infrastructure projects undertaken by government - of social supports undertaken by government - of research undertaken by government - it's pretty much an extension/set-of-tweaks for how todays economy runs, to modernize them and make them run better - and with a temporary boost in government activity in the economy, to arrest our contribution to climate change. What you oppose, is any expanded government involvement in the economy - it is an ideological obsession - you don't care whether or not something is actually a command economy, or Communist, or Stalinist - you only care about opposing expanded government involvement, as a whole. You want to force everyone to discuss whether something is or is not Communist - so that they do not discuss what the actual policies are. It's just a rhetorical attack, to block discussion.
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » CPUSA
fly_agaric wrote: » Just to delurk but am curious - Who are they?
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » Such a draconian change to the economy would come with more layers of pampered bureaucracy, as you well know, yet deny. Maybe you would be angling for a guaranteed job yourself. I called the idea you are sloganeering for command economy, because that is exactly what it would be. Greenwashed communism, an old relic of failure dug up and rehashed. Great for inner and outer party members, misery for everyone else as they end up as tiny cogs in a big socialist experiment. It is no wonder the likes of the CPUSA are jizzing in their pants over it.
KyussB wrote: » Are all forms of government jobs Communism? Is it Communist when government is responsible/in-control-of 5% of a countries GDP/economy? 10%? 20%? 40%? You just blanket oppose all forms of temporarily expanded government activity, yet haven't got good faith enough in argument, to admit it - that is the real extremist ideology here - you argue in bad faith by labelling everything you dislike as Communist. It's childish bollocks. It's deliberately shitting on the thread, because you don't like the discussion.
fly_agaric wrote: » Ok.. Communist Party of the USA probably got funding from the Soviets in their past so I would have thought you might sort of approve of them?
KyussB wrote: » Are the Democratic Party in the US, who are the main proponents of the GND, Communists?
KyussB wrote: » Check out Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez - they're the main proponents of the Green New Deal - and while their version of it doesn't quite go far enough, it's a huge step towards the left, and back towards New Deal style economic policy.
KyussB wrote: » Is 5% of temporary government responsibility/control of GDP/the-economy Communist? 20%? 40%? At what point is it Communism? The Green New Deal is all about arresting our contribution to climate change - and in the US it's the mainstream policy of the Democratic Party - and it's winning them votes by campaigning on a combined GND/Climate-Policy agenda:https://www.vox.com/2019/11/6/20951725/virginia-election-results-climate-change-2019 Are the Democratic Party in the US, who are the main proponents of the GND, Communists?
“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” Chakrabarti said… … “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” Chakrabarti added.
Tuisceanch wrote: » Yes I would agree but in no sense could that be or ever was described as a communist. Stifling debate in a democratic society on the other hand is a sure way to usher in a totalitarian state and all done under the guise of free speech.
KyussB wrote: » Ya agreed, no person would describe the Green New Deal as Communist, without aiming to stifle debate.
KyussB wrote: » Ya agreed, no person would describe the Green New Deal as Communist, without aiming to stifle debate. EDIT: Ah, no I figured your meaning based on prior posts didn't think it was supporting those posters.
Tuisceanch wrote: » Very interesting ref the economics. Must look into it. I tend to agree that the stifling of debate is deliberate,well funded and follows a known playbook. Actually if you scan back through this thread you will observe,or already observed, that somebody actually posted their playbook to help another poster. I have to admit I found that hilarious. I was actually tempted to mentally score each post, as a form of bingo,just to relieve the boredom, using SCHOPENHAUER'S 38 STRATAGEMS as the numbers. Not much of an ideologue myself but would prefer to live in a more socially equitable society with no tolerance for bogus wars against people not like us. I did vote Labour when I lived in the UK in '92 and '97 so you can imagine I became disenchanted with them afterwards as I watched a million people march in the street to be roundly ignored. I can still hear "Things will only get better" ringing in my ears. Another thing that strikes me as funny is that we have Jobbridge, Tus and Seetec, zero hour contracts. Were they all the devised and implemented under a communist regime. I must have fallen asleep for a hundred years if so.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
