Why The Green New Deal Is Bad Deal For America

The Green New Deal. These four words have become a hot topic of debate in recent years, sparking discussions and dividing opinions. While the phrase itself may sound appealing, it is crucial to deeply analyze the implications and consequences of such a deal for the United States of America. In this article, we will delve into the finer details and dig deeper into why the Green New Deal may not be the right path for our country.

The High Cost of Implementation

One of the biggest concerns surrounding the Green New Deal is its astronomical cost. Advocates of the deal propose a massive overhaul of the country's infrastructure, transitioning to renewable energy sources, investing in public transportation systems, and retrofitting buildings to be more energy-efficient. While these ideas may be noble, the price tag attached is incredibly high. Estimates range from trillions to tens of trillions of dollars, placing a burden on taxpayers and potentially straining the economy for decades to come.

Questionable Feasibility

Can the Green New Deal realistically be implemented? This is a question that needs serious consideration. The ambitious targets set by the deal, including achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions within a short timeframe, may prove to be a daunting challenge. Such a transition requires substantial advancements in technology, infrastructure, and workforce training, all of which come with their own set of obstacles. Implementing this deal nationwide without causing significant disruptions to the economy and job market will require careful planning and consideration.

WHY THE GREEN NEW DEAL IS A BAD DEAL FOR AMERICA

by Martin Capages Jr.(Kindle Edition)

5 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	1057 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Screen Reader	:	Supported
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Word Wise	:	Enabled
Print length	:	137 pages
X-Ray	:	Enabled

FREE

Impact on Jobs and Economy

While the Green New Deal promises to create millions of jobs in the renewable energy sector, we must also consider the potential loss of jobs in other industries. A rapid shift away from fossil fuels may lead to a considerable impact on workers in sectors such as oil, gas, and coal. Additionally, the costs associated with the Green New Deal can strain the economy, potentially leading to higher taxes and reduced investment, which could hamper growth and entrepreneurship.

Reliance on Unproven Technologies

One of the key issues with the Green New Deal is the heavy reliance on unproven technologies. While renewable energy sources have shown promise, they are still far from being able to solely power the entire country. The deal's insistence on completely phasing out fossil fuels without a clear alternative raises concerns about the reliability and efficiency of the proposed energy sources. Relying on unproven technologies carries the risk of energy shortages and potential setbacks in achieving the intended goals.

Diminished Individual Freedoms

Advocates of the Green New Deal often argue that drastic measures are necessary to combat climate change and secure a sustainable future. However, such measures come at the cost of individual freedoms and personal choices. The proposed deal involves extensive regulations and government interventions that can limit individual autonomy. From stricter environmental regulations to increased government control over various industries, the Green New Deal may restrict personal liberties and infringe upon the principles of free market capitalism.

Alternative Approaches

Rather than embracing the Green New Deal in its entirety, it is worth exploring alternative approaches to addressing climate change and promoting sustainability. A more balanced and gradual transition that takes into account economic realities and technological advancements may prove to be a more effective strategy. By encouraging innovation and supporting market-based solutions, we can work towards a greener future without jeopardizing economic stability and individual freedom.

While the concept of the Green New Deal may sound appealing on the surface, a closer examination reveals potential pitfalls and long-term consequences for America. The cost of implementation, questionable feasibility, potential job losses, reliance on unproven technologies, and limitations on individual freedoms all contribute to why the Green New Deal may not be the best solution. Exploring alternative approaches allows us to strike a balance between safeguarding the environment and ensuring the prosperity and freedom of our nation.

WHY THE GREEN NEW DEAL IS A BAD DEAL FOR AMERICA

by Martin Capages Jr.(Kindle Edition)

5 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	1057 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Screen Reader	:	Supported
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Word Wise	:	Enabled
Print length	:	137 pages
X-Ray	:	Enabled

FREE

The Green New Deal utilizes a propaganda technique called Appeal to Fear. It advances the notion that the U. S.  must initiate a massive and urgent State-run program that would control the climate by reducing the use of carbon-based fuels. It would simultaneously improve the lot of the poor and middle class. In truth, this proposed program would be a complete waste of human and natural resources. The entire concept is based on the false premises that carbon dioxide (CO₂) is a pollutant, CO₂ emissions are bad, that the increasing rate of CO₂ emissions from burning fossil fuels is causing the global temperature to rise which will lead to adverse climate change, and that reducing fossil fuel use is an immediate necessity to protect the natural environment from most human actions.  None of the premises are true but an entire political party has been co-opted by the ‘old’ glamour of young, naïve want-to-be Marxists who have seized on this invalid concept, The New Green Deal, to disguise a push for complete State control in all matters. The Party establishment has caved and now Democratic Socialism is a primary plank in the Party’s progressive political platform.

This book is intended to address the future role of carbon-based fuels in a rational manner and without a hidden political or ideological agenda. It is agreed that the supply of fossil fuels is finite and the natural environment is affected by its continued use.  Most of the effects are beneficial for both humans and the environment. But some are not. However, there is enough time to plan for a transition to cleaner energy without massive government intervention in the form of the control of production and the private sector. That type of government intervention is by definition-- Socialism. It has never been successful.

This is a serious matter. One that must be considered in a clear-eyed and non-ideological way. This is not a liberal arts matter, it must be considered pragmatically, with constructive thought and action. And the first practical thought is to recognize that we have plenty of time to gather the data and get it right, the American Way, not the Democratic Socialists Green New Deal way.