Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I guess there is reason for people to pretend that woke means something it doesn't. While it means socially aware,

It's not the same thing. It's being (or at least thinking oneself as being) socially aware in a very particular way. If you are socially aware but come to different conclusions than those who invented the term "woke", then you are not "woke" but are still socially aware.

It is the same thing because people might also call you socially unaware for the same reasons as saying you are not woke.

Here you go:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/woke-meaning-origin

You're welcome.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When you set an unattainable goal you ensure failure and since failure is certain there's a lot less incentive to try.

Kennedy's goal was a man on the Moon. Tough but within the realm of possibility. It took a lot of effort, it took some pretty major risks but we did it. Suppose he had said Venus, though? Would anyone have busted their ass trying to accomplish it? Only fools would have.

This is the problem with her goal--since anyone who understands the situation knows it's impossible why put out any great effort to accomplish it? While some fools in the business world suggest such an approach good managers understand it just makes the workers not care.

Anyone who understands the situation understands no one can have a real idea what improvements or breakthroughs will occur in the generation and storage of energy from renewable resources. That does not mean the people of the world should not work towards those improvements.

Anyone who understands the situations understands you have demonstrated you did not even bother to actually inform yourself of her actual policy.

I have no problem with research. Attempting to set an implementation timeframe that's impossible even if the tech was already on the shelf isn't reasonable.

Her proposal requires developing a new energy storage technology, testing it and deploying it on a massive scale in 12 years. That simply isn't going to happen. She seems to think 9 women can produce a baby in a month.

 

[RavenSky]

RE: how realistic or practical is policy proposal XYZ whose intended goal is to help prevent global ecological catastrophe through economic legislation

If there was ever a time to set a stretch goal, this is probably it. Even if we miss it by quite a bit, we'd still be on our way towards where we need to be going anyway, transitioning away from fossil fuels and toward renewable or at least less carbon-sequestering forms of energy.

In a situation like this, where it is no exaggeration to say the decisions we make now are likely to have implications for the livability of our planet and not just some of its contingent qualities, what is to be lost by going all-in on an ambitious plan?

Do you imagine that rejecting it will mean another, less ambitious plan will replace it, and that we'll carry it out to the letter and everything will be fine? You talk about "good managers", but experienced leaders know getting to the end of a project that accomplished all its goals means they didn't set high enough goals.

^^^^^^ THIS!

 

[laughing dog]

When you set an unattainable goal you ensure failure and since failure is certain there's a lot less incentive to try.

Kennedy's goal was a man on the Moon. Tough but within the realm of possibility. It took a lot of effort, it took some pretty major risks but we did it. Suppose he had said Venus, though? Would anyone have busted their ass trying to accomplish it? Only fools would have.

This is the problem with her goal--since anyone who understands the situation knows it's impossible why put out any great effort to accomplish it? While some fools in the business world suggest such an approach good managers understand it just makes the workers not care.

Anyone who understands the situation understands no one can have a real idea what improvements or breakthroughs will occur in the generation and storage of energy from renewable resources. That does not mean the people of the world should not work towards those improvements.

Anyone who understands the situations understands you have demonstrated you did not even bother to actually inform yourself of her actual policy.

I have no problem with research. Attempting to set an implementation timeframe that's impossible even if the tech was already on the shelf isn't reasonable.

Her proposal requires developing a new energy storage technology, testing it and deploying it on a massive scale in 12 years. That simply isn't going to happen. She seems to think 9 women can produce a baby in a month.

No, it does not require a damn thing - it sets an aspirational goal. There is no plenty for missing the timetable. Your criticism is based on misinformation or worse.

 

[Derec]

It is the same thing because people might also call you socially unaware for the same reasons as saying you are not woke.

Here you go:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/woke-meaning-origin

You're welcome.

It's not the same thing, as it is associated with a particular subculture. Even your link says that it is associated with Black Lives Matter and related types of activism. It's like Christianese. Evangelicals in the US have their own terminology for many things that you would not use for related concepts outside the Evangelical subculture.

 

[Derec]

There is no plenty for missing the timetable.

No penalty either.

 

[Derec]

Americans recognize the right of people to pursue their happiness. Both the UN Convention on Human Rights and US law recognize the right of people to apply for asylum at the US border.

But it does not declare migration per se as a human right. It does not declare Latinos as having the right to settle in the United States because they partially descend from Amerindians. Both those things is what AOC said.

As laughing dog pointed out, AOC said ICE does "not deserve a dime until they can prove that they are honoring human rights, until they can make a good-faith effort to expand and embrace immigrants.” This implies she'd agree ICE deserves funding if its agents stopped violating US law and human rights by imprisoning asylum seekers, and stopped harassing/mistreating people suspected of being immigrants.

She did not say anything about asylum seekers, but she called migration a human right. She did not say don't mistreat, she said embrace. Those are not the same things.

I agree with her, btw. I think any government agency with a well founded reputation for abusing asylum seekers and traumatizing children, and for being an instrument that allows an Administration to act outside of historic Constitutional constraints on the Executive Branch wrt immigration and domestic affairs, should not be funded. It should be terminated.

Again, AOC did not talk about "asylum seekers". Second, vast majority of illegals, even those who claim asylum, are not legitimate asylum seekers, but rather economic migrants. Europe made the mistake to let millions of bogus asylum seekers in and they are now paying the price. Let not US repeat EU's mistake!

 

[Derec]

No, it is not in "practice".
That does not mean she does not want ICE to deport no undocumented aliens.

I do not think she has identified any illegal she wants deported. She does not even want Shaya bin Abraham-Joseph (expelled from every school in DeKalb County for gun possession, convicted of cocaine dealing, had illegal gun when arrested by ICE) deported.

You are right, this is just like the Kamala Harris hypocrisy thread where your bigoted ideology drives you to literally make up claims.

I am not making up anything. And it is not bigotry to disagree with somebody female and "of color".

You are making projections onto her. If you have quotes that actually back up your claims, produce them.

I have backed them up, but you are incapable of even elementary reading comprehension. That is not my fault.

That is true. Unlike me, you are literally making this stuff up.

As usual, you are wrong.

 

[angelo]

She's one of a kind so far because she's doing this without the connections someone like Trump enjoys. I seriously worry for her safety and hope her fate may not be similar to that of Paul Wellstone, who arguably ended up giving his life for progressive causes.

Don't worry. She won't be travelling on any small planes because she takes the train everywhere, right?

What is it with socialists and their trains? Do they actually understand that ALL trains are built using fossil fuels including mining the iron ore to build them, or that they also use the same fuels to power them? Sure many trains use electricity, but it's generated by burning fossil fuels, and will remain so long into the foreseeable future.

 

[angelo]

I have no problem with research. Attempting to set an implementation timeframe that's impossible even if the tech was already on the shelf isn't reasonable.

Her proposal requires developing a new energy storage technology, testing it and deploying it on a massive scale in 12 years. That simply isn't going to happen. She seems to think 9 women can produce a baby in a month.

No, it does not require a damn thing - it sets an aspirational goal. There is no plenty for missing the timetable. Your criticism is based on misinformation or worse.

My aspirational goals are to be a billionaire in the not too distant future. But I know that my chances of achieving that are at best zilch!

 

[angelo]

Here's a giggle for those of us who are rationalists...............................https://gellerreport.com/2019/02/my...ezs-green-new-deal-until-they-read-this.html/

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It is the same thing because people might also call you socially unaware for the same reasons as saying you are not woke.

Here you go:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/woke-meaning-origin

You're welcome.

It's not the same thing, as it is associated with a particular subculture. Even your link says that it is associated with Black Lives Matter and related types of activism. It's like Christianese. Evangelicals in the US have their own terminology for many things that you would not use for related concepts outside the Evangelical subculture.

Everyone else is starting to use it too. Maybe you just aren't woke to that yet.

 

[untermensche]

Here's a giggle for those of us who are rationalists...............................https://gellerreport.com/2019/02/my...ezs-green-new-deal-until-they-read-this.html/

That article says France pays 3 times more for health care than the US.

As to the individual costs, the US is one of the nations that spends the most, ranking second in health care costs per capita at $8,608, while France spends only $4,086 per capita.

https://www.myfrenchlife.org/2014/03/20/health-care-france-vs-us/

The first "fact" checked turns out to be bullshit.

Only a bullshitter would link to it.

The Myth of High Youth Unemployment in France

In France, many fewer young people work than in the United States because higher education is largely free and students get stipends from the government. As a result, the employment rate for French youth is 28.3 percent, compared to 50.1 percent for the United States. If we look at unemployment as a share of the total youth population, the 8.7 percent rate in France is not hugely higher than the 5.8 percent rate in the United States.

http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/the-myth-of-high-youth-unemployment-in-france

Students being forced to work to pay for skyrocketing education costs is seen as a plus by some US capitalists.

 

[Toni]

There is no plenty for missing the timetable.

No penalty either.

The end of the world as we know it???

 

[laughing dog]

I do not think she has identified any illegal she wants deported....

That does not mean she does not want ICE to deport no undocument aliens. She may believe what you claim, but nothing she has said directly point to i.

I am not making up anything.

Yes, you are. You are literally attributing positions to people who have not made them.

And it is not bigotry to disagree with somebody female and "of color".

No one made that claim.

I have backed them up, but you are incapable of even elementary reading comprehension,,,

Of course you have backed up your poorly reasoned straw men - that is what you do. But they are still straw men. In this very thread, you posted you are "distilling" her views from her comment. Elementary reading comprehension indicates that you are literally attributing positions to people that they have not overtly made. So unless you can prove you are both omniscient and infallible, that means you admitted you are literally making these things up. Whether or not you feel you have sufficiently "backed them up" is irrelevant to the fact that AOC did not take the positions you claim.

 

[Derec]

I know, right? Reminds me of how publishing anything critical of Trump make you un-American.

You mean like how now publishing anything critical of anybody "brown" makes you "racist"?

 

[Angry Floof]

If the quote is real, what I object to is her invoking Allah just as I object to any Christian politician invoking their brand of magical bullshit into our politics.

 

[Derec]

Everyone else is starting to use it too. Maybe you just aren't woke to that yet.

I think a lot of people are using it ironically.

 

[Derec]

What is it with socialists and their trains? Do they actually understand that ALL trains are built using fossil fuels including mining the iron ore to build them, or that they also use the same fuels to power them?

I don't know. I am neither a socialist nor do I hate fossil fuels. Trains are a tool, like planes and cars/trucks. And they all have their strengths and weaknesses. One can fall into the opposite trap. For example opposing expanding MARTA rail because it is trains, even though rail has long-term advantages over bus rapid transit despite higher upfront costs. Including hidden costs, like the fact that the iron-iron interface is a better solution for heavy loads than rubber-tarmac. Buses tear up roads pretty bad. The damage done is not proportional to the axle load, but roughly to the 4th power of axle load. That means that a 15t 2 axle bus does as much damage to the roadway as 10,000 1.5t cars. Buses have their purpose, as you can't cover area by rail, but servicing main "arteries" with bus rapid transit instead of expanding rail lines like metro Atlanta is doing is not a good long-term policy.

Sure many trains use electricity, but it's generated by burning fossil fuels, and will remain so long into the foreseeable future.

The energy mix for energy production can shift though. Especially if you do not exclude nuclear for ideological reasons.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Everyone else is starting to use it too. Maybe you just aren't woke to that yet.

I think a lot of people are using it ironically.

So you understood when I wrote you weren't woke to it.

QED