AOC’s Green New Deal Was Inaccurate, Not Too Extreme

No it’s not too extreme, it’s just off the mark. As in chess, accuracy matters. When addressing such large issues efficient engineering design including social engineering, is requisite. It’s better to let reformed capitalism pay for a transition to ecological economic infrastructure itself through investment morphing, than tax dollars. Regulations and incentives are requisite for creating ecological economic infrastructure

The present capitalist creative destruction is an extreme process firmly established and quite costly. Resistance is futile. In judo one redirects the opponents energy rather than directly opposing it as might a Marxist hoping for an atom-smasher synthesis of a new, bigger atom smasher.

The corporatist-socialist party owns the broadcast media and concentrates wealth for the 1% while degrading the health and viability of the world ecosphere. The corporate media and entertainment businesses have forced moral decay on the U.S.A., academia is awash in environmental atheists without any spiritual sense at all nor respect for individuals and families. It is an elitist ‘we know better than the minions’ cult.

Even so ecospheric reform appears necessary for human survival on Earth. The economic infrastructure is old style unsustainable. It consumes the ecosphere and biosphere converting it into disposable consumer items and manure. Highly entropic systems. Reform is needed, and it would seem far more extreme than AOC’s one goal of reducing greenhouse gas plus neo-socialism. It wasn’t comprehensive enough. Interesting ideas though. maybe she will read an environmental economics textbook. She has a degree in economics.


Ecological Economics, Second Edition: Principles and Applications 2nd Edition – PDF Version