In apparent proof that it is possible to run out of other peoples’ money, California appears to be aborting its high-speed rail project less than a week after the
Green New Deal Great Leap Backward™ crowd announced that the whole country would be switching back to trains from air travel over the next 10 years.
I was going to write that none of the Green New Derpsters were available for comment, but that isn’t strictly true. However, the editorial standards here at Hogewash! don’t allow such language.
Oh, and everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.
Who’s gonna fill out all the environment impact statements and other paperwork required by the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, etc. in order to cover vast swaths of environmentally sensitive vegetation and wildlife habitat with sunlight-blocking solar panels and bird-killing windmills? And how will all that paperwork move through the permitting system and NIMBY litigation so quickly?
Asking for a friend who’s a government contractor at the Corps of Engineers.
Victor Davis Hanson has a post over at American Greatness that takes a look at how the various contenders for the Democrat’s 2020 presidential nomination are shaping Trump’s ability to use their own rhetoric against them. In passing, he notes that it will be difficult for the Democrats to sell the idea that we can rebuild our infrastructure using battery-powered versions of these—
His analysis of the candidates is equally insightful. Read the whole thing.
And it’s a great source of sparkles!
I’m an Electrical Engineer. When I first saw the abbreviation GND yesterday in reference to the Green New
Deal Derp, my immediate thought was of ground. In EE-speak, a ground (often abbreviated GND) is a structure that can serve as a source and sink of electric current. As such, it is the place that is the reference point for measuring electrical potential (what’s commonly called voltage), so it’s the place of zero potential.
GND has zero potential.
Much of the initial pointage, laughery, and mockification of ¡Ocasio! She Guevara’s Green New
Deal Derp has been about cattle farts and high-speed railways to Hawaii. My first reaction when I heard about the proposed elimination of the fossil fuels wasn’t to think of my car because I was cooking at the time—on my gas stove.
I grew up in Nashville, the heart of TVA country, in a house with an electric stove. My mother loved it because it was easier to manage than the coal stoves she learned to cook on. However, gas stoves are even more responsive than electric. Because of the thermal mass of the element in an electric “burner,” there can be a significant delay between turning a knob and a change in heat delivery. OTOH, a gas flame’s heat output quickly tracks the flow setting. When we built Mrs. Hoge’s kitchen that she used for teaching and her personal cheffing business, we installed a 6-burner gas stove with a 36-in oven along with a 27-in electric wall oven for small baking jobs. (A 36-in gas oven is great for two turkeys at a time, but it’s overkill on a pizza.)
The other significant modification that we made to stately Hoge Manor was to replace the electrical radiant heating with a gas furnace when we switched from window air conditioners to central HVAC. The house is much more comfortable, and the heating costs lower. Oh, and we switched to a gas dryer while we were at it. The water heater is still electric.
We switched from electrical heating and cooking in order to improve the energy efficiency of our house. The Green New Derp would be a Great Leap Backward™ for me.
BTW, I’m an Electrical Engineer.
Congress can pass legislation, but “ye cannae change the Laws of Physics.”
Jeff Dunetz has a post over at The Lid about ¡Ocasio! She Guevara’s “tax fairness” proposal. He quotes her as saying.
You know, you look at our tax rates back in the ’60s, and when you have a progressive tax rate system, your tax rate let’s say from zero to $75,000 may be 10 percent or 15 percent, etc. But once you get to the tippy-tops on your 10 millionth dollar, sometimes you see tax rates as high as 60 or 70 percent …
Uh, wrong! The 70 precent top rate on incomes above $100,000 was a holdover from the ’40 and ’50s. One of the key accomplishments of the Kennedy Administration in the ’60 was to get the top rate lowered to 50 percent as a means of stimulating economic growth. Even corrected for inflation, her imagined threshold income for the top rate is an order of magnitude higher than the ’50s value. She’s set her definition of rich too high.
In any event, her numbers don’t add up with the current distribution of incomes. Jeff includes the following table—The top marginal rate is now about 40 percent. If doubling the rate didn’t result in the rich moving more of their their assets offshore and the taxman could take twice as much money from them, one could expect about a 20 percent increase in revenue. Personal income taxes would increase 40, but personal income taxes are only about half of the government’s take. That would provide roughly 800 billion dollars a year, which would not quite offset the deficit expected before implementing She Guevara’s Green New Deal. In fact, doubling everyone’s taxes wouldn’t provide enough money to fund her schemes.
UPDATE—With her congressional pay, Ms. Occasional-Cortex will be entering the upper 5 percent of income earners. Perhaps this will provide her with the same sort of practical education experienced by other who have climbed the income ladder.