Safety image.
I was wondering about the costs of the Green New Deal, and I ended up with a conclusion.
1. AOC made the GND as a political tool rather than actual thoughtful legislation, which is why it was a non-binding resolution from the begining.
2. I’m, ironically, glad that Mitch Mconnell kidnapped the GND in the Senate, and made it something dangerous for centrists democrats. AOC should be legislating actual enviromental regulations rather than pulling this Trump-style shit slinging. It’s beneath her.
What I did notice about the GND is that according to Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who might be in a right-wing partizan organization but also headed the CBO, it would cost an annual 9.3 trillion dollars. That figure is more than twice the US federal budget. If the US were to take out a “loan” for the GND next year-without raising taxes- it alone would increase the national debt by around 44%.
But according to Holtz own estimate, only around 6-7.5% of the 9.3 trillion dollars would be dedicated to “green” infrastructure. Most of the Green New Deal is, basically, financial stuff. Carrying out the GND without the financial obligations it sets up to meet, would still require a whopping increase of the Federal budget, by around 30%.
BUT!!! What I also noticed is that south of the border, Mexico’s government already has every single financial obligation* AOC wants to implement in the US. Mexico then, could, in theory, copy paste the GND... then delete it because the actual document doesn’t say anything relevant, and then write a law that impulses the investment in green infrastructure that AOC demands... But here.
So, the infrastructure alone would cost 1.23 trillion per year for the US, a country that is;
5x larger
3x more populated
3x higher GDP per capita (PPP)
6% lower Budget/GDP margin.
56% higher Debt/GDP margin.
Than Mexico
Since the 1.23 trillion is for the USA, not the USM... one could argue that if that number were to be sliced to represent the size, cost of labour, and population of Mexico... it might just sort of make sense to think about it. Mexico also has a significant lack of infrastructure, which is normally bad. But here it’s an advantage.
Since we have to start from zero, it’s easier than getting rid of old stuff that is bad for the enviroment. Since many millions of Mexicans are migrating into cities every year, you could also argue that her requirement to make buildings “green” could also be met through better building codes.
*: We can debate about the Mexican government’s effectiveness later.