4 ms·

> I really wish the "Green New Deal" wasn't mentioned in these pushes for the future. Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? > I don't think i

> I really wish the "Green New Deal" wasn't mentioned in these pushes for the future. Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? > I don't think it deserves any credit for the few good ideas that it did contain Why would something not deserve credit for any good ideas it contained? > Sure, it's recognizable, but not necessarily in a good way. I'm really not trying to nitpick, but it seems like you're overgeneralizing. To whom would it be recognizable but not necessarily in a good way?

hinkley 6y ago
> Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? That's nowhere near as useful as "What do you think we can reasonably expect at least 180 million (geographically distributed) Americans to accept?" It is time that tech people looked themselves in the mirror and said, "Nobody gives a damn what I want, and I should stop acting like they do." There is no point system. We get nothing for 'being right' but not getting any traction. There is no gold star waiting for you at the end (and we aren't 6). You can't solve policy problems thinking the same way you do about convincing more than half of a room of people to upgrade that library you use. That's four people, possibly including yourself. While success may make my life a lot easier, that barely ranks as an accomplishment. Large groups of people are so much harder to manage than small groups that it's not even funny. "Politics is the Art of the Possible"
- bigbob2 6y ago
  That has nothing to do with the parent wishing for the Green New Deal not to be pushed by Noam Chomsky. Also as far as I'm aware, Noam Chomsky is not a tech person so I don't see where your "we aren't 6 and get nothing for 'being right'" argument is relevant there. If anything it's snarky and probably goes against the guidelines of this website. On the other hand, I guess this entire article and thread do as well.
nomel 6y ago
> Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? Since you seem to agree, I'll give this privilege to you. > Why would something not deserve credit for any good ideas it contained? It was a packaging of some ideas, not the source. > I'm really not trying to nitpick, but it seems like you're overgeneralizing. To whom would it be recognizable but not necessarily in a good way? It had no regards for feasibility, and most people noticed. I don't think using the name of something infeasible is good when you're proposing something that you want to be considered feasible. It also contained very significant social programs that are usually unrelated.

hinkley 6y ago

> Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? That's nowhere near as useful as "What do you think we can reasonably expect at least 180 million (geographically distributed) Americans to accept?" It is time that tech people looked themselves in the mirror and said, "Nobody gives a damn what I want, and I should stop acting like they do." There is no point system. We get nothing for 'being right' but not getting any traction. There is no gold star waiting for you at the end (and we aren't 6). You can't solve policy problems thinking the same way you do about convincing more than half of a room of people to upgrade that library you use. That's four people, possibly including yourself. While success may make my life a lot easier, that barely ranks as an accomplishment. Large groups of people are so much harder to manage than small groups that it's not even funny. "Politics is the Art of the Possible"

bigbob2 6y ago
That has nothing to do with the parent wishing for the Green New Deal not to be pushed by Noam Chomsky. Also as far as I'm aware, Noam Chomsky is not a tech person so I don't see where your "we aren't 6 and get nothing for 'being right'" argument is relevant there. If anything it's snarky and probably goes against the guidelines of this website. On the other hand, I guess this entire article and thread do as well.

nomel 6y ago

> Yes, and what do you personally prefer to see instead? Since you seem to agree, I'll give this privilege to you. > Why would something not deserve credit for any good ideas it contained? It was a packaging of some ideas, not the source. > I'm really not trying to nitpick, but it seems like you're overgeneralizing. To whom would it be recognizable but not necessarily in a good way? It had no regards for feasibility, and most people noticed. I don't think using the name of something infeasible is good when you're proposing something that you want to be considered feasible. It also contained very significant social programs that are usually unrelated.