The Green New Deal

12 comments on “The Green New Deal ”

• Comments are now closed

1. lprent 1

   15 May 2009 at 1:15 pm

   That is a good bundle on first glance through. Simple effective and based on future needs rather than the past (unlike the Waterview connection). All available to start immediately and without requiring large scale consultation or legal processes.

   Labour should look at adopting these as well if there aren’t significant ‘gotchas’ in the bundle.

   captcha: betrayal car
2. jarbury 2

   15 May 2009 at 1:20 pm

   Yes very good work by the Greens. The investment in State Housing is especially important as there has been little private investment in housing over the past year or so – this will lead to higher house prices and rents in the future if government doesn’t increase supply of housing.

   It also creates a crap load of jobs: 10,400 FTE direct jobs, multiplying to 28,600 FTE jobs total. That soaks up a lot of the people likely to end up unemployed over the next year or two.
3. Maynard J 3

   15 May 2009 at 1:34 pm

   Wow. And all National and the cream of our business community could come up with is a cycleway.

   Interesting concepts – unlike tax cuts, costs are short term and there are direct, tangible and reportable benefits as well as numberous less-easily reported benefits.

   So this is what being in opposition is all about. I hope to hell that Labour are working on a comprehensive shadow budget.
4. gingercrush 4

   15 May 2009 at 1:35 pm

   I can’t agree with the State Housing. I support some increase in state housing but not 2 billion worth. I can’t agree with the shift in transport and I don’t quite understand the waterways part of it.

   This though is what the Greens should be portraying to New Zealand. None of its loony as such. Sure some will question the amount to be spent on state housing and won’t agree with the the shift in transportation but its nothing that is fringe and merely distracts the party. Whereas, the things that are fringe and do distract the party are often loony.
   • jarbury 4.1

     15 May 2009 at 1:41 pm

     Gingercrush, all that extra money spent on state housing stock wouldn’t have to be kept as subsidised housing. The government could sell some of it to private owners to ensure that you don’t get overly concentrated areas of state houses.

     Just think…. 28,000 jobs saved.
5. r0b 5

   15 May 2009 at 1:37 pm

   This push for a Green economy is the way America is going too. It’s the only way. Labour – I hope you’re listening!

   The Obama administration is using Earth Day for launching another all-out effort to sell the American public and key lawmakers on “green jobs” as the solution for the United States’ environmental and economic woes.
   …
   The administration must also try in the next few weeks to push through Congress a budget resolution that raises spending in several energy-related areas, again with the promise of creating millions of new jobs in the renewable-energy arena.

   It has become increasingly clear that the administration’s central theme — not to mention its pitch to key lawmakers — is that energy-related legislative priorities are based not only on environmental merits but on their ability to create jobs.

   Both Obama’s allies and his critics say such a message is aimed at broadening the constituency for such initiatives — rallying the traditional “green” vote as well as blue-collar workers and the U.S. manufacturing base.

   “This is the kind of ‘for everybody Earth Day agenda’ that the Obama administration stands for,” White House Council on Environmental Quality adviser Van Jones said yesterday. “There’s a wingspan on these jobs goes from GED to Ph.D.”

   Jones added, “The administration is committed that green jobs be good jobs, and there’s a strong commitment to make sure that it actually happens.”

   Certainly highlights how foolish our current government’s “do nothing and hope for the best” strategy is.
6. Gareth 6

   15 May 2009 at 2:21 pm

   Needs some more work on the quantified benefits from spending, and funding questions inevitably arise but the general concepts in there are very attractive.
7. insider 7

   15 May 2009 at 3:42 pm

   I’ve already spotted one dodgy statistic on the first line of the exec summary of their stimulus package, and I was skim reading!

   It says there are 2:1 health benefits from home insulation. I don’t think so. The only study I know of that has got close to quantifying the benefits was Ralph Chapman’s and he came up with 1.73, which was toltal not just health and is not 2. Also it was in Dunedin so the insulation benefits are likely to reduce the further north you go

   The Greens can’t say they didn’t know as Russel did a media release on it…

   I note there are almost no notes or references to back up their claims in the doc also. So not a good start.
8. George Darroch 8

   15 May 2009 at 8:02 pm

   I like the idea that they’re taking it round the country to get feedback. While this is good for the policy, it’s also good campaigning and free publicity (if seen to be genuinely listening).

   As for refs, I hope it’s a ref’d document, but I don’t expect parties to release the final product weighed down by footnotes – perhaps these should be supplied on their website in a seperate page?
9. Anthony Karinski 9

   15 May 2009 at 8:37 pm

   I believe insider’s question has already been answered on frogblog. As GD is saying one don’t tend to see parties release a heavily referenced summary to the media. I suspect the greenies got it all backed up and will publish it all in due course. That’s more than what can be said for Hide and his Super Sloppy…
10. RedLogix 10

    16 May 2009 at 8:54 am

    Anyone else noticed that increasingly it is the Opposition that gets to frame the debate these days?

Links to post

1. Shouting into the void at The Standard: posted on 6 July 2009 at 9:31 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS