I'll share this to FBook, though 95% of the friends there are liberals who will, sadly, pay no more heed to this then they do most of the rest of the information I try to share there. Few want to risk rocking the boat - even if it is carrying them ever more swiftly to a perilous waterfall.
That's right Bill, the reign of Neoliberalism has had a couple of minor adjustments under Biden, but as some insightful commentators have pointed out, there is no one in federal or state agencies to actually carry out the Green New Deal, even if it had been accepted as policy, which it wasn't. I think James Galbraith's rather pessimistic analyses at Project Syndicate are pretty much on target. Thus Neoliberalism is still the dominant paradigm with maybe the global trading picture the most threatened in terms of China and Russia and at the margins, Iran.
Don't you think it's rather impolite at this time to point that out?
I was thinking all the lines that the Dem hierarchy doesn't want to hear left and green bleating at this point which would spoil their emotional high, and of course for everyone the task is to beat Trump first and then have the usual "who controls the state" debates...even though the clear answer is the Neolibs of the corporate elite. How do you design a new grid when the energy players can't decide what share of generation and transmission each will get and the outcome will in good part determine the how and where of the new power lines...It might have made sense to put de-centralization on the table two decades ago, but aside from a few projects, I don't think that is on the mind of any major players. I mean that the situation inside the grids is just chaotic from a transition standpoint, and only a strong federal planning role with greens on board can rectify the situation. Of course, the private sector might come up with their own version of that as well, but so far haven't as I can see inside PJM. The public is represented there by the state energy commissions - PUblic service Commissions where the strongest voices are again corporate leaning at least...only the woebegone "rate payers office" is there for the "public good."
I mean all the above was apparent 10-20 years ago, if not longer...as alternative energy grew alongside of gas and now different designs of nuclear are back on the table.
Bill - the Sanders original version of the Green New Deal called for public power via expansion and repurposing of the existing federal Power Administrations. That whole idea has gone deeply down the Memory Hole.
Did you read Normon Solomon's piece harkening back to Hubert Humphrey's '68 failure to separate from LBJ's Vietnam War policy? That's EXACTLY what we have going on again.
I'll share this to FBook, though 95% of the friends there are liberals who will, sadly, pay no more heed to this then they do most of the rest of the information I try to share there. Few want to risk rocking the boat - even if it is carrying them ever more swiftly to a perilous waterfall.
That's right Bill, the reign of Neoliberalism has had a couple of minor adjustments under Biden, but as some insightful commentators have pointed out, there is no one in federal or state agencies to actually carry out the Green New Deal, even if it had been accepted as policy, which it wasn't. I think James Galbraith's rather pessimistic analyses at Project Syndicate are pretty much on target. Thus Neoliberalism is still the dominant paradigm with maybe the global trading picture the most threatened in terms of China and Russia and at the margins, Iran.
Don't you think it's rather impolite at this time to point that out?
Ah yes, Bill. I stepped over those "behavioral" red lines again! No class. Or is it working class? hahahahaha!
I was thinking all the lines that the Dem hierarchy doesn't want to hear left and green bleating at this point which would spoil their emotional high, and of course for everyone the task is to beat Trump first and then have the usual "who controls the state" debates...even though the clear answer is the Neolibs of the corporate elite. How do you design a new grid when the energy players can't decide what share of generation and transmission each will get and the outcome will in good part determine the how and where of the new power lines...It might have made sense to put de-centralization on the table two decades ago, but aside from a few projects, I don't think that is on the mind of any major players. I mean that the situation inside the grids is just chaotic from a transition standpoint, and only a strong federal planning role with greens on board can rectify the situation. Of course, the private sector might come up with their own version of that as well, but so far haven't as I can see inside PJM. The public is represented there by the state energy commissions - PUblic service Commissions where the strongest voices are again corporate leaning at least...only the woebegone "rate payers office" is there for the "public good."
I mean all the above was apparent 10-20 years ago, if not longer...as alternative energy grew alongside of gas and now different designs of nuclear are back on the table.
TVA is the model. Think if their mission was reoriented to renewables, regional ecological "sustainability", and local small scale development.
Bill - the Sanders original version of the Green New Deal called for public power via expansion and repurposing of the existing federal Power Administrations. That whole idea has gone deeply down the Memory Hole.
Did you read Normon Solomon's piece harkening back to Hubert Humphrey's '68 failure to separate from LBJ's Vietnam War policy? That's EXACTLY what we have going on again.