Talk:Green New Deal - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.4.103.187 (talk) at 11:36, 23 February 2019 (→Feinstein). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:36, 23 February 2019 by 98.4.103.187 (talk) (→Feinstein)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Environment: Sustainability / Climate change

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Misplaced Pages:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sustainability task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Climate change.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Economics

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Finance & Investment Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

generic

should be more generic. Chendy (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it needs to be specific to this actual tabled proposal. Now it is.

If anything it needs more on the implementation and some comment on the practicality and fate of some of these proposals that have been around for decades.

Implementation concerns

For instance: "changes to the... financial system, including the reduction of the ...interest rate, once again to support green investment" has been proposed many times since at least the 2005 World Mayors' agreement on climate change agreed at COP11 in Montreal. But a general reduction of interest rate doesn't do this, unless there are higher rates for all non-green investment, which means there must be a way to tell one kind of investment from another, and that's where all such proposals tend to fall down and never get implemented.

Arguing for "large financial institutions - 'mega banks' - to be broken up into smaller units" makes the "green banking" problem in some ways more difficult as these small units must be watched and regulated without the advantages of leveraging political power on a bigger enterprise. So such proposals must be accompanied by a streamlined financial risk and regret regulation system (read "Seeing tomorrow, Dembo and Freeman, 1998, on what that must look like) and there must be a way of sharing the scenarios, projections, and so on so that fundamental risks can be assessed. The reasons banks got big in the first place was because there was no way to insulate them from major price shocks of various kinds. If they are to stay small, they must be able to measure and anticipate risk far better than any previous financial institutions.

Arguing for "the re-regulation of international finance: ensuring that the financial sector does not dominate the rest of the economy" and especially for "re-introduction of capital controls" is going to fall on deaf ears without clear proposals on how that re-regulation is to be implemented. Tobin tax, carbon tax directly on the commodity market pricing itself, and on all transactions between currencies, etc., are viable, but they must be spelled out in great detail if something as onerous as capital-control is to come back.

As for "increased official scrutiny of exotic financial products such as derivatives" this is of no value whatsoever as the "officials" do not have the skills to supervise or scrutinize. it's impossible, without the above-mentioned shared financial risk assessment structure and some agreement on a capital asset model, to agree on what constitutes an unacceptable regret or over-exposure to a given risk. Without the software and systems in place, there's no "scrutiny" possible except after the fact.

Some of the proponents of the GND have argued for a specific way to proceed like implementing the new global structure for online transactions, exempting online-only transactions from all national regulation as a carrot to users of online-only currency, then offering to implement it for the legacy national fiat currencies. .

As for "the prevention of corporate tax evasion by demanding financial reporting and by clamping down on tax havens", this can never be achieved without a clear definition of profit and loss, and *this* can never be achieved without a more uniform capital asset model worldwide. This is more or less what the IMF, World Bank and BIS are working on with the TEEB and associated UN System of National Accounts reforms.

Some good quotes from credible sources on all of the above would be helpful in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.9.221 (talk) 21:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Green New Deal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Should Justice Democrats Be Listed Under Notable Proponents?

Should Justice Democrats (https://en.wikipedia.org/Justice_Democrats) be listed under Notable Proponents? Disaster Area (talk) 08:38, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Make this Green New Deal page exclusively about USA effort?

Should we spin this out as a separate article for the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez effort? The lorax (talk) 21:07, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

The "AOC GND" should indeed have its own article or at least a separate section.Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure I seen the point of a separate page since AOC has taken down ALL reference to the Green New Deal from her website. Manawyddan (talk) 10:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Tulsi Gabbard should be listed as a proponent

I think Tulsi Gabbard should be listed as a proponent of the Green New Deal.

According to https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/02/04/democrat-presidential-hopefuls-dont-say-green-new-deal/ she is "one of the most aggressive Democrats when it comes to climate policy. Introduced in January 2017, her bill Off Fuels for a Better Future Act has been cited as one of the pieces of legislation that could feature in a Green New Deal."

That's not the only reference of course, as she has been pushing for a Green New Deal throughout her campaign.

Son of eugene (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

This article should be deleted

Why is a proposed bill, that hasn't even been fully written, have a Misplaced Pages page? This should be added to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and this page deleted. It's not important enough to have a page. Ergzay (talk) 18:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Wiki does not wait to see if a law passes. Wiki covers the debates on major proposed legislation that has not been enacted because the debate on it is real and includes many prominent leaders. for example see Wilmot Proviso Rjensen (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Ergzay, this is a notable proposal independent of AOC. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

What is the scope of the proponent section?

Looking at the names right now, about half of them are endorsing the American plan put forward by House Democrats. The other half are speaking about the need for overhauling the adoption of clean energy without saying the phrase "green new deal" or referring to specific legislation at all. So do we need to narrow the criteria? If not, we can essentially add every public figure who has ever spoken up about the environment. E.g. Margaret Atwood, Noam Chomsky, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Glenn Greenwald, Stephen Lewis, Bill Maher, Bill Nye, David Suzuki, Naomi Wolf and so on. Also, Tulsi Gabbard would qualify as mentioned above despite saying that the wording in the current iteration is too vague. Connor Behan (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Feinstein

A video of Diane Feinstein arguing with about why this can't happen went viral and should be added to the Criticism section. 98.4.103.187 (talk) 11:36, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Categories: