On the Green New Deal front, I want to point out that people debating it are largely talking past one another. The actual Green New Deal is HR 109 and SRes 59,

On the Green New Deal front, I want to point out that people debating it are largely talking past one another. The actual Green New Deal is HR 109 and SRes 59, the text of which is here: https://ocasio-cortez.house.gov/sites/ocasio-cortez.house.gov/files/Resolution%20on%20a%20Green%20New%20Deal.pdf https://ocasio-cortez.house.gov/sites/ocasio-cortez.house.go... . It is a non-binding resolution, meaning it does not actually change any laws or implement any policies, it's simply a statement that the House would like something to happen. It's literally just a statement of intent that we should get to zero net emissions. You'll hear people tout numbers about it costing $100 trillion dollars or something ridiculous, but it's simply not possible to calculate the cost of a vague goal. You'll also hear people claiming things like that the Green New Deal will ban airplanes, but again this is a non-binding resolution, and it doesn't even describe anything as specific as solid policy proposals. Don't get me wrong, we absolutely should debate the climate policy in the US. And we can refer to such policies as the "Green New Deal". But in debates people often act like the Green New Deal is a literal set of laws and policies written down.