Sworn in on Jan. 3, AOC has already helped destroy 27 billion dollars, and 25,000 jobs. Good start?

[miketx]

Blondes are now telling jokes about her.

 

[peach174]

That's what he says. They do not need these big tax breaks if NY is so great. This is legalized blackmail. Even Sean Hannity has criticized the tax breaks and he is not a supporter of Cortez.

That's what he says. They do not need these big tax breaks if NY is so great. This is legalized blackmail. Even Sean Hannity has criticized the tax breaks and he is not a supporter of Cortez.

Funding for a Green New Deal is available in some of the same ways FDR produced his version:

This Radical Plan to Fund the Green New Deal Just Might Work

"A network of public banks could fund the Green New Deal in the same way President Franklin Roosevelt funded the original New Deal.

"At a time when the banks were bankrupt, he used the publicly owned Reconstruction Finance Corporation as a public infrastructure bank.

"The Federal Reserve could also fund any program Congress wanted, if mandated to do it.

"Congress wrote the Federal Reserve Act and can amend it.

"Or the Treasury itself could do it, without the need even to change any laws.

"The Constitution authorizes Congress to 'coin money' and “regulate the value thereof,” and that power has been delegated to the Treasury. It could mint a few trillion dollar platinum coins, put them in its bank account, and start writing checks against them.

"What stops legislators from exercising those constitutional powers is simply that 'everyone knows' Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation will result.

"But will it?

"Compelling historical precedent shows that this need not be the case."

If the Green New Deal generates millions of living wage jobs, it will produce a big uptick in consumption which in two-thirds of US GDP.

As long as we don't reach a point where too many dollars are chasing too few goods, inflation will not be a problem.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

 

[dudmuck]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

The jobs didnt disappear.

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

you allow these massive tax breaks for corporations, the whole country will turn into this:

 

[ColonelAngus]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

The jobs didnt disappear.

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

you allow these massive tax breaks for corporations, the whole country will turn into this:

They didn’t appear either.

New York is hemorrhaging residents and their tax base because their taxes are too high.

 

[miketx]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

The jobs didnt disappear.

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

you allow these massive tax breaks for corporations, the whole country will turn into this:

Fake news. Fake American.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Normally, it takes years for a socialist to destroy 27 billion dollars in revenue and 25,000 jobs....it took Alexandria Cortez less than 2 months to do this to New York.....not a bad start.....now she just has to start digging the mass graves, cause they don't dig themselves...

Yet you can't describe her actions and her actions alone why they decided to withdraw.

amazon said so. what else do you need to know? The people of NY know it was her. You see the banner?

Did you read who paid for that billboard? It says paid for by Job Creators Network. If you look it up, that organization was started by former Home Depot CEO, and it is a group that has a definite conservative slant. No, it's not a group that represents New Yorkers as a whole, it is a group that just represents business owners.

 

[Moonglow]

Amazon like all corporations probably would have built a stick built building with lax fire codes and reduced sprinkler systems..

 

[airplanemechanic]

AOC is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[22lcidw]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

The jobs didnt disappear.

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

you allow these massive tax breaks for corporations, the whole country will turn into this:

We are taxed high in our nation. We subsidize so much waste it is stupid. How much do we subsidize New Orleans? The Mississippi River wants to change course and we spend bookoo dollars stopping it and we then spend the excessive amounts of money to subsidize citizens living there. Letting half of the city go under water would alleviate the pressure for resources while promoting an industrial base. You can still protect the core areas and others with job making capacity.

 

[georgephillip]

Funding for a Green New Deal is available in some of the same ways FDR produced his version:

This Radical Plan to Fund the Green New Deal Just Might Work

"A network of public banks could fund the Green New Deal in the same way President Franklin Roosevelt funded the original New Deal.

"At a time when the banks were bankrupt, he used the publicly owned Reconstruction Finance Corporation as a public infrastructure bank.

"The Federal Reserve could also fund any program Congress wanted, if mandated to do it.

"Congress wrote the Federal Reserve Act and can amend it.

"Or the Treasury itself could do it, without the need even to change any laws.

"The Constitution authorizes Congress to 'coin money' and “regulate the value thereof,” and that power has been delegated to the Treasury. It could mint a few trillion dollar platinum coins, put them in its bank account, and start writing checks against them.

"What stops legislators from exercising those constitutional powers is simply that 'everyone knows' Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation will result.

"But will it?

"Compelling historical precedent shows that this need not be the case."

If the Green New Deal generates millions of living wage jobs, it will produce a big uptick in consumption which in two-thirds of US GDP.

As long as we don't reach a point where too many dollars are chasing too few goods, inflation will not be a problem.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

Can you tell us who is calling for "knocking down and rebuilding ever single structure in America in 10 years...?"

 

[dudmuck]

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

The jobs didnt disappear.

Stupid fucking liberals don’t realize how much tax 25,000 people earning over $150,000/year would have paid.

Stupid fucking liberals in this thread and stupid fucking liberals in New York government.

No concept of hw taxes work, just straight up morons.

you allow these massive tax breaks for corporations, the whole country will turn into this:

We are taxed high in our nation. We subsidize so much waste it is stupid. How much do we subsidize New Orleans? The Mississippi River wants to change course and we spend bookoo dollars stopping it and we then spend the excessive amounts of money to subsidize citizens living there. Letting half of the city go under water would alleviate the pressure for resources while promoting an industrial base. You can still protect the core areas and others with job making capacity.

oh yea..

 

[Hossfly]

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

Can you tell us who is calling for "knocking down and rebuilding ever single structure in America in 10 years...?"

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

 

[rightwinger]

Such power for a freshman Congresswoman

 

[georgephillip]

Funding for a Green New Deal is available in some of the same ways FDR produced his version:

This Radical Plan to Fund the Green New Deal Just Might Work

"A network of public banks could fund the Green New Deal in the same way President Franklin Roosevelt funded the original New Deal.

"At a time when the banks were bankrupt, he used the publicly owned Reconstruction Finance Corporation as a public infrastructure bank.

"The Federal Reserve could also fund any program Congress wanted, if mandated to do it.

"Congress wrote the Federal Reserve Act and can amend it.

"Or the Treasury itself could do it, without the need even to change any laws.

"The Constitution authorizes Congress to 'coin money' and “regulate the value thereof,” and that power has been delegated to the Treasury. It could mint a few trillion dollar platinum coins, put them in its bank account, and start writing checks against them.

"What stops legislators from exercising those constitutional powers is simply that 'everyone knows' Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation will result.

"But will it?

"Compelling historical precedent shows that this need not be the case."

If the Green New Deal generates millions of living wage jobs, it will produce a big uptick in consumption which in two-thirds of US GDP.

As long as we don't reach a point where too many dollars are chasing too few goods, inflation will not be a problem.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead

Simon Patten was the Wharton School of Finance and Economy's first professor of economics in 1881; his view of the relationship between government and the economy was shaped more by German influences than by British "free trade" orthodoxy.

Patten's view was government should function as a fourth factor of production whose principle economic concern is to reduce the cost of living and doing business.

Simon Patten on Public Infrastructure and Economic Rent Capture | Michael Hudson

"Public Infrastructure as a Factor of Production
"How the U.S. government increased prosperity was by creating infrastructure in the form of canals and railroads, a postal service, and public education as a 'fourth' factor of production alongside labor, land, and capital.

"Taxes would be 'burdenless,' according to Patten, if invested in public internal improvements, headed by transportation infrastructure. 'The Erie Canal keeps down railroad rates, and takes from local producers in the East their rent of situation.'

"'Notice, for example, the fall in the price of [upstate New York] farms through western competition' by making low-priced crops available from Western farms.'

"'Likewise in the cities, public transport would minimize property prices (and hence economic rent) in the center relative to the outlying periphery[6] (Patten 1892, in 1924: 98).'"

More Ivory tower bullshit. Economists need the equivalent of what Scientists have in Engineers to cut through the theoretical crap and implement things that actually matter in the real world.

More Ivory tower bullshit. Economists need the equivalent of what Scientists have in Engineers to cut through the theoretical crap and implement things that actually matter in the real world.

A valid idea in science is endorsed by either theories or theorems. Economics largely relies on assumptions and not on connecting logic or being confirmed through numerous experiments and observations.

Additionally, Economics, as it's taught today, confines itself to the doctrines of neoliberal capitalism which makes as much sense as teaching a course on Religion that limits its scope to the tenets of Evangelical Christianity.

 

[georgephillip]

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

Can you tell us who is calling for "knocking down and rebuilding ever single structure in America in 10 years...?"

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

I suspect you're right about Trump's veto (assuming he's still in office), but it's hard to deny the series of components under the "Green New Deal" umbrella enjoy substantial levels of public support:

Why the Green New Deal Includes a Jobs Guarantee

"The components of the Green New Deal also have overwhelming support.

"And so, while you may hear that these are somehow radical proposals, unviable, every one of their components are extremely popular, from the universal healthcare, which is the component that enjoys seventy percent popularity, to the Job Guarantee component that has sixty-five percent popularity, to the Green New Deal that is also in the sixties.

"Essentially it’s a mainstream program. So what we really need to have, I think, is a groundswell of support from the public.

"To use FDR’s words, when he was putting in place the New Deal, he basically told his electorates, 'Make me do it.'

"And I think that that is what is going to have to happen. There has to be enormous pressure, and I think we see it.

"So I’m cautiously optimistic that whether presidential hopefuls or future members of Congress will feel enough pressure to start doing something meaningful."

 

[2aguy]

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

Can you tell us who is calling for "knocking down and rebuilding ever single structure in America in 10 years...?"

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

I suspect you're right about Trump's veto (assuming he's still in office), but it's hard to deny the series of components under the "Green New Deal" umbrella enjoy substantial levels of public support:

Why the Green New Deal Includes a Jobs Guarantee

"The components of the Green New Deal also have overwhelming support.

"And so, while you may hear that these are somehow radical proposals, unviable, every one of their components are extremely popular, from the universal healthcare, which is the component that enjoys seventy percent popularity, to the Job Guarantee component that has sixty-five percent popularity, to the Green New Deal that is also in the sixties.

"Essentially it’s a mainstream program. So what we really need to have, I think, is a groundswell of support from the public.

"To use FDR’s words, when he was putting in place the New Deal, he basically told his electorates, 'Make me do it.'

"And I think that that is what is going to have to happen. There has to be enormous pressure, and I think we see it.

"So I’m cautiously optimistic that whether presidential hopefuls or future members of Congress will feel enough pressure to start doing something meaningful."

Giving people free stuff is always possible.....the mass graves that are filled with the people who object to the idea....are usually hidden from the people benefitting from the theft....

 

[martybegan]

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

You have the understanding of economics similar to a drunk howler monkey.

Same as AOC.

What's your understanding of MMT?

Modern Monetary Theory and Taxing the Rich

"I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important.

"For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

"The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending.

"This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue."

A Green New Deal that provides enough livable wage jobs to soak up our current excess capacity will not necessarily lead to inflation as long as those working those jobs consume goods and services.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead.

True keysean economics has never really been tried because coupled with the deficit spending during contraction periods is supposed to be paying down the debt during expansion periods.

And people talking about government removing "excess capacity" remind me too much of the principles of government in 1984.

Hyperinflation is proof the government CAN'T just print money.

The purpose of government is overhead. the purpose of taxes is to fund that overhead

Simon Patten was the Wharton School of Finance and Economy's first professor of economics in 1881; his view of the relationship between government and the economy was shaped more by German influences than by British "free trade" orthodoxy.

Patten's view was government should function as a fourth factor of production whose principle economic concern is to reduce the cost of living and doing business.

Simon Patten on Public Infrastructure and Economic Rent Capture | Michael Hudson

"Public Infrastructure as a Factor of Production
"How the U.S. government increased prosperity was by creating infrastructure in the form of canals and railroads, a postal service, and public education as a 'fourth' factor of production alongside labor, land, and capital.

"Taxes would be 'burdenless,' according to Patten, if invested in public internal improvements, headed by transportation infrastructure. 'The Erie Canal keeps down railroad rates, and takes from local producers in the East their rent of situation.'

"'Notice, for example, the fall in the price of [upstate New York] farms through western competition' by making low-priced crops available from Western farms.'

"'Likewise in the cities, public transport would minimize property prices (and hence economic rent) in the center relative to the outlying periphery[6] (Patten 1892, in 1924: 98).'"

More Ivory tower bullshit. Economists need the equivalent of what Scientists have in Engineers to cut through the theoretical crap and implement things that actually matter in the real world.

More Ivory tower bullshit. Economists need the equivalent of what Scientists have in Engineers to cut through the theoretical crap and implement things that actually matter in the real world.

A valid idea in science is endorsed by either theories or theorems. Economics largely relies on assumptions and not on connecting logic or being confirmed through numerous experiments and observations.

Additionally, Economics, as it's taught today, confines itself to the doctrines of neoliberal capitalism which makes as much sense as teaching a course on Religion that limits its scope to the tenets of Evangelical Christianity.

Any course on marxism is in essence a course on economics, so your last point is no point at all.

 

[georgephillip]

What about the way FDR removed excess capacity in the US after Pearl Harbor? The Green New deal could mobilize resources in the say way without killing 3% of the world population circa 1940.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

How would knocking down and rebuilding every single structure in America in 10 yrs. work with that Green New Deal?
They can't even get a high speed rail built in California ,taking 11 years with nothing being built yet.
There is no way every single structure could or even should be knocked down.
It's ludicrous.

Can you tell us who is calling for "knocking down and rebuilding ever single structure in America in 10 years...?"

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

There ain't gonna be no damn Green Deal, George and if it should happen to pass in Congress, Trump will veto the stupid ass plan.

I suspect you're right about Trump's veto (assuming he's still in office), but it's hard to deny the series of components under the "Green New Deal" umbrella enjoy substantial levels of public support:

Why the Green New Deal Includes a Jobs Guarantee

"The components of the Green New Deal also have overwhelming support.

"And so, while you may hear that these are somehow radical proposals, unviable, every one of their components are extremely popular, from the universal healthcare, which is the component that enjoys seventy percent popularity, to the Job Guarantee component that has sixty-five percent popularity, to the Green New Deal that is also in the sixties.

"Essentially it’s a mainstream program. So what we really need to have, I think, is a groundswell of support from the public.

"To use FDR’s words, when he was putting in place the New Deal, he basically told his electorates, 'Make me do it.'

"And I think that that is what is going to have to happen. There has to be enormous pressure, and I think we see it.

"So I’m cautiously optimistic that whether presidential hopefuls or future members of Congress will feel enough pressure to start doing something meaningful."

Giving people free stuff is always possible.....the mass graves that are filled with the people who object to the idea....are usually hidden from the people benefitting from the theft....

Giving people free stuff is always possible.....the mass graves that are filled with the people who object to the idea....are usually hidden from the people benefitting from the theft....

What "free stuff" are you imagining the Green New Deal offers?
"20 Million Green New Deal Jobs
The Green New Deal will 'convert the decaying fossil fuel economy into a new, green economy that is environmentally sustainable, economical secure and socially just,' according to the Green Party US website.

"The bill is expected to generate up to 20 million new jobs and guarantee full employment, with the government being the 'employer of last resort.' The bill proposes to shift the United States to 100 percent clean, renewable energy by 2030."

Check Out: Emerging Jobs That Could Make You Big Bucks in the Future"

The Cost to Fund the Green New Deal — What You Need to Know

You might also consider how many mass graves capitalism has filled over the past five hundred years.

Capitalism Is Threatening American Values. Are We Paying Attention?

 

[iceberg]

Normally, it takes years for a socialist to destroy 27 billion dollars in revenue and 25,000 jobs....it took Alexandria Cortez less than 2 months to do this to New York.....not a bad start.....now she just has to start digging the mass graves, cause they don't dig themselves...

a bit dramatic.

she didn't destroy it or the jobs. they simply moved elsewhere.

considering amazon is catching a shitton of fire for the lack of taxes they pay, the types of jobs those are and so much more - she may have a point on this one. i don't know enough about the local economy and the deal they were offered to know if in the end this is good or bad. but i tend to not fall in line with dramatic statements.