Economic recovery “green” in EU and China. Why not here?

This opinion is not the end all, but it seems that the argument of “why should we go green if no one else is” may be moot. Is environmentalism a dirty word just in the US? And if so, why?

7 thoughts on “Economic recovery “green” in EU and China. Why not here?

    1. Your opinion piece was well written and entertaining.

      There are places for public works projects. They’re called infrastructure. We’ve been hearing that from the regime since the president rode that escalator from the great beyond.

      We could be building roads, bridges, even tunnels now as social distancing is not that problematic in the field or steel factories. We are dropping trillions like spare change in an arcade. Yet, recall the debate on whether we could spend one trillion over a decade for our infrastructure.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Well, yes, but that’s not Keynes point.

        Keynes specifically wanted to hire labor to produce nothing of value, rejecting building railroads in favor of pyramids.

        The idea was to generate aggregate demand with those wages without producing goods and services for them to buy, thus correcting a perceived imbalance.

        That’s why today’s Keynesians are going for green energy. It adds nothing to the supply of goods and services (green electricity is the same as much cheaper natural gas electricity) but it puts wages into the hands of those who will immediately spend it.

        The idea appeals to zero-sum puppet masters, but is so preposterous that everyone else thinks they must have something else in mind.


        1. Green energy is not “nothing of value”.

          It is a transition we and the rest of the world will make whether we like it or not. Future generation will probably prefer to breathe cleaner air, drink cleaner water and restore fisheries.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Future generations will wonder why we wasted do much capital on green energy that could never supply our needs that could have been put to better use building out nuclear power while we used natural gas as a bridge.

            And there is no measurable difference in air cleanliness between natural gas and green energy when cradle-to-grave accounting of pollutants is considered.


  1. If the plan is to isolate ourselves, make everything we want and export the rest, we may want to peek out from under our security blanket and see what the rest of the world is doing.

    The idea that we are an exceptional island on this big “island” is myopic. WW2 is long gone and we may no longer be the king of the hill. Put more bluntly, who will buy our cars if they are not up to international standards? We can’t sell many products in the EU that don’t meet standards we either scoff at or don’t agree with. GMO’S for example.

    A basic premise of any enterprise is to know the market. The market is global and if we want to continue this historic 75 years of peace among the first world nations and the new powerhouses in Asia I think we need more than this “stop the world, I want to get off” plan.

    If this pandemic teaches us anything, it should be that global perspectives are necessary. We found that out when the administration refused tests in favor of the home grown variety. Or we had to source PPE’s and discovered that we were still shipping them overseas, and overseas suppliers sold to us.

    Do we really need to insulate ourselves totally or trade intelligently?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s