Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by ChiefGator, Jan 1, 2019.
its the $12MM study money.
Sandy’s plan is something like what a leftist-educated 10th grader who knew nothing of economics and finance might devise, giving full rein to wishful thinking, immature idealism, ignorance of history and mis-education about capitalism. Sandy’s Plan Michael S. Rozeff New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (“Sandy”) proposes that America build a new stock of capital goods to meet certain energy requirements she thinks we should have. Our current capital stock is worth something like $50 trillion. Sandy has spent years studying how toothpaste, hats, computers, keys, can openers, computers and everything else are made. She now believes that Pelosi can appoint a committee of 15 representatives (9 Democrats and 6 Republicans) and these 15 people in 2 years can produce a PLAN to change everyone’s production techniques to achieve Sandy’s energy goals. These goals are clearly stated in her proposal and need not be copied out here. Let’s just say that they are as ambitious as they are arbitrary and that they amount to building a new capital stock. If a Central Committee of this sort reminds you of the 20th century totalitarian states that failed their epic experiments with socialism, you are not alone. One of her goals is “upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety…” It seems that Sandy lacks the concept of COST. She also does not understand that investments are supposed to have positive net present values, that is, the discounted stream of future returns is supposed to exceed the discounted stream of costs. All of her energy proposals take for granted that the “investments” are worth their costs. How does she or any committee, even after consulting with various groups, know this? There is a role for entrepreneurs that Sandy misses altogether. Sandy completely lacks the concept of entrepreneurship and what entrepreneurs do. The word “Green” stuck in front of “New Deal” apparently makes such matters irrelevant. Someone should tell Sandy that the first New Deal was a failure. Once every company is subjected to the new energy mandates, the value of its existing capital stock will tumble. Much of existing capital will be unusable and unable to cover the costs of changing the energy structures now in place. Vast amounts of wealth destruction will occur. Congress has the power to do everything Sandy proposes. All of it would be constitutional. This sad fact shows us to what depths this country has sunk in departing from its philosophy of freedom. It is why we would do well to consider dissolving the federal government altogether. Freedom is a mockery in Sandy’s plan. Sandy proposes more. She proposes “a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one.” Who guarantees, hires, trains, monitors the work and pays for it? Her plan says “the Plan (and the draft legislation) shall” do this. Who pays for new energy techniques and systems? This is unclear. One passage suggests that bonds will be issued. They will be marketed to banks and the Federal Reserve. Presumably, companies will issue them via government guarantees, which means they are really government bonds. The hitch is that the new energy investments are not destined automatically to be profitable. Their costs are unknown. They are not routinely incurred by profitable companies at this time, and foreign locations might out-compete American companies forced to undergo the green treatment idolized by Sandy. It’s not clear that these bonds can be sold without bankrupting the federal government, raising interest rates steeply and creating inflation. The experiences of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Venezuela will prove instructive, as they instituted their widespread plans. The uncertainty in all of this massive change will mean a depression that will tie the hands of government and Federal Reserve. Somehow, by putting everyone to work who wants to work at investments whose payoffs are unknown (likely negative) and whose financing is uncertain (likely entirely infeasible), prosperity is supposed to result that eliminates poverty. Sandy’s plan is a cousin to Elizabeth Warren’s plan to turn the capital of companies over to their employees and other stakeholders. What these plans have in common, besides destroying what’s left of capitalism and free markets in America, is amazing ignorance of economic realities. Plus ignorance of financial and investment realities. Plus ignorance of the processes by which profitable and useful capital is accumulated to serve consumers. Sandy’s plan is something like what a leftist-educated 10th grader who knew nothing of economics and finance might devise, giving full rein to wishful thinking, immature idealism, ignorance of history and mis-education about capitalism. These plans endorse massive socialism with nary a reservation about its values, its feasibility and its actual history. These are truly astonishing exercises in ignorance.
But she's just fringe.
no change to pass none
It's the new age approach to the Cloward-Piven strategy. Given that millennials have been raised with a hatred of all things corporate, and the environmentalism movement has been hijacked by the anti-corporate crowd, one prong of the approach is to decimate corporations by forcing them to abide by absurd, costly regulations that will either drive them out of business, or result in government infusions of funds, accompanied by government control of the businesses themselves (first move to publicly-held ownership, under tight government control, before moving to government ownership, government control, aka communism). Couple this with all of the "social responsibilities" they are driving for, ie a guaranteed wage, government-run healthcare, free college education for all, etc, and you end up completely overwhelming the system, resulting in a full transformation through Socialism into Communism. Cloward-Piven focused on overwhelming the welfare system to achieve sweeping change. These "Brand New Congress" representatives are completely dedicated to transforming America to their Marxist view of a Utopian State, which has proven to be unachievable countless times. To provide the REAL quote from Margaret Thatcher: "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money" But what if creating a Marxist society isn't really the end goal?
Hahahahahaa....I hate this woman and consider her less than hot air. But you also just described Trump.
I REALLY, REALLY, hate her.
I’ve been saying that for years.
Great points except I don't think much of the making things obsolete is constitutional unless the federal government pays for it. They could perhaps effect all new types of things, but taking old or requiring massive changes without a real reason hopefully would not pass the courts.
I don't think he meant the plan would really be Constitutional. I think he meant the Supreme Court would allow it.
OK, I don't think that they would unless compensation was paid, but then I am not a lawyer, and after one more elderly justice is replaced by Trump his estimation of what the court would allow might change.
You're kidding, right? She isnt calculating enough to play checkers.
Wait she calculates but it’s called play the victim card.
She doesn't appeal to you, and comes across as an idiot? Newsflash - she isn't trying to appeal to you, me, or even to most of the over-40 crowd of dems on GC. She's trying to appeal to the millenial-and-under anti-corporate, anti-establishment crowd. Here's excerpts from a Washington Post article about her, written by someone from her target audience: "She exhibits contradictions that suggest an actual personality. She makes mistakes that a real human might make. The average person seems to find such relatability compelling, while the bafflement of the professional politicos shows how poorly they understand the preferences of most Americans..." "Ocasio-Cortez seems to take a particular delight in being herself, in contrast to the average politician who is constantly calibrating his or her personality to remain acceptable to all sides. Discarding Capitol Hill protocol allows her to embrace opportunities that others can’t, on every platform available to her..." "There’s an analogue here, though at first glance it seems like an exact opposite. In 2016, America elected Donald Trump because he seemed authentically different. He was extremely willing to bypass the old ways of doing things, or at least to burn them all down. Ocasio-Cortez is harnessing much of that same outsider energy, except in a far more uplifting mode — and many Americans find it similarly attractive. It’s refreshing to watch someone who seems comfortable operating outside of the system, who seems both able to imagine a new approach to political action and also to genuinely believe that it could work." She's well educated, and groomed for the role she is playing, which is to be a youth-movement democrat (operating as "Brand New Congress") using America's youngest voters to drive the democrat party MUCH further to the left.
I hope that no Republican will participate in this foolish committee, thus it would be on Dems whatever they come up with.
[QUOTE="no1g8r, post: 834547, member: 1513]She's well educated.[/QUOTE] She has a degree. A degree that landed her a parttime waittress job. It is a good indication of what these victim studies degrees are worth. She doesnt show the slightest indication of any education whatsoever.
She has a degree. A degree that landed her a parttime waittress job. It is a good indication of what these victim studies degrees are worth. She doesnt show the slightest indication of any education whatsoever.[/QUOTE] It might be a calculated move on her part to appeal to the common man. Those that voted for her saw her personally and yet voted for her. She sure appears to be an idiot, but an actor can appear that way.
She makes mistakes a person with no wisdom or knowledge would make. The people who follow her make the same mistakes.
Not to mention the foolish nature of the entire idea, there is not enough raw materials, manufacturing capability, or money to do the energy portion of the proposal. IMPOSSIBLE!!!
Ignorance of economics is nothing to be ashamed of. Unless, of course, you are a Congressman with a plan that, if implemented, will destroy the economy and lead to the enslavement of the population.
You don't have the necessary permissions to use the chat.