AIA President William Bates has issued a statement praising the efforts of a Green New Deal, an ambitious resolution put forth by Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that addresses the immense threat of climate change while stimulating the economy through sustainable job creation across various sectors.
The transformative package of policies, announced yesterday, is both broad and bold, giving attention to everything from environmental justice and labor to health care and education. And to get there, the road map calls for a range of policy-driven projects that would heavily touch on the building industry, which accounts for nearly 40% of CO2 emissions in the United States.
Most notably, the bill calls for densifying urban areas and demands the U.S. “upgrade all existing buildings and build new buildings, to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability"—both of which would have huge impacts for how and what architects design.
Much of what would be required by the resolution matches the mission of the AIA's adopted 2030 Commitment, a global initiative to help architecture and engineering firms achieve reduced energy consumption in new and existing buildings. In his statement applauding "the efforts of Congress and its committees this week to find new ways to support achieving a carbon neutral future by 2030," Bates noted that "by investing in infrastructure, upgrading the existing building stock, and improving resilience in the built environment, we can make progress towards AIA’s 2030 Commitment goals."
Bates also called on Congress to go further by swiftly enacting "public policies today that will address the dire consequence we're facing." To advocate for action on issues of climate change, resilience and incentivizing energy efficient technologies, AIA members will be visiting Congress later in March to meet with House and Senate committees, including Energy & Commerce, Transportation & Infrastructure, Energy & Natural Resource, Environment and Public Works, and the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.
159 Comments
Holy shit, did they read it? It’s Absolutely idiotic. They ought to watch the Frye festival doc to see the dangers of big promise with no plan or understanding of how to make stuff work.
The dems are going to guarantee trump a 2020 win if these are the imbeciles that they are running. They are like furries that live in a furry convention and don’t realize that the rest of the Nation thinks that they are ridiculous.
This thing is nothing short of a socialist coup, and a long shot authoritarian power grab.
At least Passive House, rural level 3 charging and $3 floor per gallon of gas via adjustable tax would get *sensible* conservative buy in.
I read all your comments jla-x... thanks for being a thinking human being. Just when I think I'll get back into architecture, I realize how out of touch the profession is and I come to my senses.
I read all your comments jla-x... thanks for being a thinking human being. Just when I think I'll get back into architecture, I realize how out of touch the profession is and I come to my senses. The Green New Deal is utterly crazy.
i love the dems. i love AOC. i find jla-x to be annoying.
thanks for listening.
Awesome! Yeah they are feel good cheerleaders for sure. AOC is essentially trying to mandate perpetual motion machines and unicorns. Yes we can! Yes we can! Her green new deal is a hilarious gift to the republicans. How is she going pay for it, create the technology? Girl power!
Seriously flat earther level ignorance. We should be able to sue politicians for false advertising!
She is making them look bad...the rest of the dems are trying to be down with the young cool kid...and looking like Rodney dangerfield in “Back to School”
You may be overstating the case. 5% of Trump's essence is enough to pollute anybody, but Republican's appetite for cynicism and hypocrisy knows no bounds. There does seem to be a flaw in the plan if this Slate article below is to be believed, but the effort to highlight the importance of a green future is dead on. Get used to brown girls playing in the sand lot. https://slate.com/business/2019/02/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-flaw-land-use.html
Lmfao Thayer. I love this bs argument that “brown girls” are somehow immune to criticism for bad ideas or else racism is playing a part. My whole family is filled with “brown girls” including my daughter. Morons come in all colors and genders. This proposal is moronic and shame on the AIA for putting politics before logic and endorsing it. Casual ignorance is a dangerous thing. You cannot mandate technological progress. You can’t wave a wond and create utopia without extreme authoritarian controls. They will cause a civil war.
Also, I know quite a bit about the climate science and know that we need to change stuff, but that has to happen organically. It will. Invest in science and research! Not mandate the pipe dream of someone who may or may not have taken a sustainability 101 course and now thinks they can change the world. That’s extreme Trump level arrogance!
Who said brown girls aren't immune to criticism? They weren't even allowed to watch the game until recently. And the point isn't brown girls, it's everybody, including white males should be able to contribute if we stand a chance of getting ahead. Nobody is talking about utopia...every positive change starts with a dream.
“Get used to brown girls playing in the sand lot.” You said it as if they are a monolithic. My wife is brown and thinks AOC is an idiot as well. You put that in there to suggest I am biased or something. AOC would get me very excited if she wasn’t a moron with bad ideas. She is energetic and enthusiastic which is a good thing. Her bad ideas spoil her great character.
I didn't mean to imply that you're bias, just that the reaction against her seems over the top, including yours. I agree she's got a long way to go as the article I posted from Slate points out, but how do you justify calling her a moron for trying to address serious issues? Compared to what the right spew out on a daily basis, there's no comparison.
Thayer, the reaction she is getting has to do with her unique talent for politics, her magnetic personality, paired with really really dangerous ideas and a really ignorant millennial voting population with a sense of entitlement. The ideas alone are moot in the hands of some boring person like Chuck Schumer. She is the useful idiot that precedes totalitarianism.
You dumb, https://twitter.com/jsmooth995/status/1093903173096493057
I’m cool! I’m hip!
AOC is the real deal. She's young, enthusiastic, absolutely fearless, and on our side.
Watch: AOC schools Congress with ‘Lightning Round Game’ exposing the chilling role of money in politics
CNN played this with a headline that she was attacking Trump, completely ignoring the fact that she disemboweled congress from floor of the House.
If your ad blocker won't let you see it, use a private browser window.
She makes several good points in there. I’ll give her credit where due.
Pointing out the problems in the system are all together different than proposing solutions. Anyone can complain about gravity being a problem for flight, but not everyone can figure out how to build
a jet.
Cool and the gang.
Jla, she got you to post 11 time in about an hour on an architect forum. That's well past disagreeing with her ideas and into obsession. The extent to which she's controlling you is really remarkable.
Her brand is an existential threat to the future.
*snort*
It's George Bush's 'New World Order' on steroids. Also known as Venezuela or EU v.1. When it craters it will be because they didn't go far enough to the left.
If it’s down to the choice between second term Trump and some AOC like candidate you will see the biggest flight from the Democratic Party ever. They are making Trump the safe bet vote. I didn’t think that would be possible.
We don't deserve democracy.
I am canceling my AIA subscription! This is an absolute joke!!!!! No way in HELL I am supporting AOC!
OneLost, I think I really enjoy this comment a lot because you made an excellent joke and I get it. But I may be wrong?
:-)
This is 'virtue signaling' by the AIA to the nth degree. What a joke of an organization.
jla-x, you may have a point, after reading this article. I still don't feel comfortable calling her a moron, only because Trump deserves it over anyone else, but it would really help progressives to be more pragmatic. The podcast version is pretty damning.
https://slate.com/news-and-pol...
Thayer, there’s room for condemnation on all sides. It’s imo criminal to try and persuade people to vote for you based on impossible policies that cannot materialize politically, mathematically, or scientifically.
GND is too much for conservatards to agree to and libtards to pay for.
1. Passive House needs to be the standard for all new construction, not LEED. Period.
2. Level 3 quick chargers and cheap 125 mile EVs need to go rural, not just downtown.
3. Gas tax needs to be dynamic, to maintain a $3 floor so nobody buys guzzlers when it’s $1.
4. Attrition laws paint coal and nuclear into a corner, allowing solar/wind/batteries to dominate.
5. Ending air subsidies drives investment to rail.
a thinly veiled jla-x? demonstrates complete ignorance of economics
Can you explain your version of "economics"?
I thought libertarians hated all subsidies?
That’s not me.
It's assumed I'm JLA-X because I'm not pro AOC's angry victim culture rage revenge fantasy stupidity. I'm actually a liberal green. Efficiency in government might mean firing 50% of workers, but you'll get buy in from the rich for any legit "green" plan that needs temporary taxation until parity.
Sounds libertarian to me. Complete ignorance of economics, government inefficiency, etc.
Please explain why government needs to be inefficient.
Which 50%?
as far as buildings go, the federal government could pass an act similar to the ADAAG based on best practices within ASHRAE and the IECC. that's obviously achievable.
there is a 2030 challenge in architecture as well https://architecture2030.org/2...
per Thayer's slate link about how 100% renewable energy by 2030 isn't possible, here is what the draft resolution in the original link says about 2030:
(4) global temperatures must be kept below 1.5 de-grees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will re-quire—
(A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emis-sions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and
(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050;
The medicine is worse than the disease
Basic primer on Modern Monetary Theory, which is a fundamental part of what AOC is putting forth:
Governments budgets are not like household budgets. Household budgets have revenue and expenses, and as such have to balance their budgets. Governments, since they create sovereign currency, can never run out of money.
Proof #1: The Great Bailout provided some $17t to banks and insurers. Where did that money come form? Remember, the US government was $10t "in debt" at that time.
Proof #2: The government never has a problem "paying for" (funding) corporate subsidies, endless ongoing wars, tax breaks for corporations and billionaires, etc. It is only on social issues (health, education, infrastructure) that "we can't afford it".
Proof #3: The current debt is some $22 trillion, rising at 5% annually, and there is no sign of inflation.
Proof #4: Remember the Trillion Dollar Coin? This idea was floated in 2011 as a way to increase the amount of money the government could legally spend. Where was this new money to come from? It wasn't to be borrowed, it was to be magically created by minting some coins and saying they were worth $1t each. I suspect one of the primary reasons this plan was shelved was because it would have clearly proven once and for all that the entire economy ("we can't afford it") is a sham.
The national debt is simply one side of a balance sheet. Since the government creates all the money, the other side of that balance sheet is the money in circulation. Plus on one side, minus on the other. If the national debt was paid off all money would be removed from circulation and the economy would completely collapse.
The purpose of taxes is not to provide operating revenue to the government, since the government can create as much money as it needs it has no need for revenue. The purpose of taxes is to regulate the economy and behavior.
Regulating the Economy: Inflation is a condition where there is to much money in circulation. This is not corrected with interest rates, which are simply a scam to further enrich the parasite banking cartels, but with taxes, which take money out of circulation.
A very simply metaphor for this is a faucet pouring into a sink. If the water level (money in circulation) is too low, the flow is increased by turning the tap (increasing the money supply). If the water overflows the sink (too much money = inflation) the drain size (taxes) is increased to lower the water level. Not exactly rocket science.
Regulating Behavior: Every time taxes on cigarettes is increased the number of smokers goes down. The behavior is changed due to economics. If taxes prohibited the accumulation of vast quantities of wealth, that wealth would not exist and would not be available to buy government. There would be no PACs and SuperPACs, lobbyists, all-expense-paid junkets to whorehouses in Bali, insider trading tips for congressmen, etc. Citizens United would be irrelevant.
I suggest reading Stephanie Kelton for more information and a better explanation and understanding of these matters.
Deficit spending leads to inflation. In this case it would be a hyperinflation greater than Zimbabwe or Venezuela or Germany before WW II. The economy would collapse and be replaced by a barter system to a large degree. Those without skills to barter (the poor) would be hurt the worst as their government transfer payments would buy little or nothing.
Wrong. As stated the deficit is now over 20 trillion and there is no inflation. Venezuela Has been subject to extreme economic violence from the US for decades.
US Blockade on Venezuela Has Cost US$350 Billion: Report
And that's just since 2013.
Miles: The US government is corrupt and evil! Also Miles: let’s put the US government in control of everything!
Every hyperinflation in history has been caused by foreign debt service collapsing the exchange rate. In other words, by external forces, not internal. This is similar to how the EU has collapsed half of Europe, as member countries have no sovereign currency.
It amazes me that some architects, of all people, are the ones crying “settle for less”, when our world simply can’t afford to. Very disheartening. Even the very thought or suggestion of change is too much for some people. No wonder McMansions proliferate the U.S. and architecture gets reduced to the bare minimum wherever possible.
The socialists don’t give a shit about “our world” they only use it as a justification to grab power. They are power hungry politicians just like the rest. How could smart people fall for such empty bs. Even if you are correct, and they are “good”, how to you keep good people in power of such an expanded controlling govt in a democracy? You can’t. It’s a big lie, and will destroy the country as it has every other time it’s been attempted. All AOC and the far left is doing is ensuring Trump the 2020 win.
jla-x, you keep glossing over the absolute criminal that Trump is while slamming socialists. Got it that you don't like socialism, but not stopping to acknowledge the absolute disaster of Trump is to leave a gaping hole in your argument. Just saying.
That would be preaching to the quire. Yes, crony capitalism and corporatism of the neo-con era is damaging. Yes trumpism is damaging. Neither however consolidate state power to the degree socialism does. Question is, in a democracy would you want trump jr inheriting a government that has further expanded powers? Assuming AOC is a “good guy”, how do you prevent trump jr or some far left wacko like Maduro from being elected down the road in a democracy? You can’t. My argument is about not expanding the power of the state in any circumstances, regardless of the “ism” that it’s done in the name of.
I think it's choir, but a fellow bad speller here. I'd actually like to see less but more effective government. We should encourage the animal spirits of a capitalism since it's part of our basic human nature, just make it fairer for little guys to compete, meaning eliminating the requirements for lawyers and accountants that add incredible expense for small developers to add the fine fabric that makes for interesting pedestrian cities. That said, I think we need no growth boundaries that will allow our ecosystems to heal, plus a fat old gas tax to pay for a public transportation revolution. I'm also for doubling the amount of teachers and doubling their pay, think health care is a right, not a matter of wealth, and I love working well with other countries, be they socialist or not. What party is that?
nihilistic libertarians?
narcissistic libertarians
“Taking over the world by leaving people alone” so narcissistic...
Do you often leave people alone 100 comments at a time?
"(2) the goals described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph (1) (referred to in this resolution as the “Green New Deal goals”) should be accomplished through a 10-year national mobilization (referred to in this resolution as the “Green New Deal mobilization”) that will require the following goals and projects—
(A) building resiliency against climate change-related disasters, such as extreme weather, including by leveraging funding and providing investments for community-defined projects and strategies;
(B) repairing and upgrading the infrastructure in the United States, including—
(i) by eliminating pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as much as technologically feasible;
(ii) by guaranteeing universal access to clean water;
(iii) by reducing the risks posed by climate impacts; and
(iv) by ensuring that any infrastructure bill considered by Congress addresses climate change;
(C) meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources, including—
(i) by dramatically expanding and upgrading renewable power sources; and
(ii) by deploying new capacity;
(D) building or upgrading to energy-efficient, distributed, and “smart” power grids, and ensuring affordable access to electricity;
(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification;
(F) spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry;
(G) working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible, including—
(i) by supporting family farming;
(ii) by investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health; and
(iii) by building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food;
(H) overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in—
(i) zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing;
(ii) clean, affordable, and accessible public transit; and
(iii) high-speed rail;
(I) mitigating and managing the long-term adverse health, economic, and other effects of pollution and climate change, including by providing funding for community-defined projects and strategies;
(J) removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and reducing pollution by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage, such as land preservation and afforestation;
(K) restoring and protecting threatened, endangered, and fragile ecosystems through locally appropriate and science-based projects that enhance biodiversity and support climate resiliency;
(L) cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites, ensuring economic development and sustainability on those sites;
(M) identifying other emission and pollution sources and creating solutions to remove them; and
(N) promoting the international exchange of technology, expertise, products, funding, and services, with the aim of making the United States the international leader on climate action, and to help other countries achieve a Green New Deal;"
GND
I really don't get the objections by some, who in their right(!) mind would be against any of those points? What kind of sock puppet must one be?
I’m not against any of those cherry picked points. I am against mass mobilization of govt to half ass achieve them for political purpose. The US can’t solve this alone. It’s a planetary problem. Global warming is not their goal, it’s getting power over industries and property of the wealthy. The economic effects of such an ambitious goal will be catastrophic. The political effect will be tumultuous. The scientific effect will be to further fuel the false idea that climate change is a leftist propagated hoax.
Who said anything about half ass achieving those points? They are totally doable, achievable points. Just because we are faced with a planetary problem doesn't mean the US shouldn't try to do something about that planetary problem (of which they are a major cause by the way) or at least try to mitigate the effects of that planetary problem, if not for yourself maybe for your kids or future grandchildren, or mine ;)
Because everybody knows the moment that shit really hits the fan it will be the poor schmucks already struggling that will pay for it, like we could see in New Orleans for example. It's never the 1% that feels the effects of such disasters, while they are the ones that have the means and opportunity to prevent them causing too much damage, if any.
You are also looking at this from an outdated 20th century perspective, the economic effects of not doing anything to prepare your infrastructure, or not transition your economy to renewables will be even more catastrophic.
Also, simply think about all the lives that will be saved if you don't have to go and invade oil-rich countries with bogus claims because you don't even need their oil in the first place?
I don’t share your optimism for political solutions or trust that they have our best interests in mind. I do share your beliefs that something needs to change. This new deal however will likely collapse the economy and cause mass unrest before any measurable change materializes. AOC is also very naive if she thinks that this will ever pass. The republicans would obstruct it at every step. Science aside, Promising something this unlikely to happen is disingenuous and manipulative to the public. We need to stop this snake oil form of politics. Yes, trump did it too. No need to point that out.
Your ability to understand how this works, is staggering.
We need to obliterate political parties, and promote constructive collaboration between individuals. Political parties are the number one problem in this country.
B3, sorry I don’t trust politicians like con artist Elizabeth warren. Why you do is beyond me. We have a system that filters the worst of the worst to the top of political power. Until that changes, I’m not willing to give them anymore power.
First, those aren't "cherry picked" that's copied from the resolution. Second, there's nothing in that list that isn't achievable. Third, laying out a bold resolution, with large aspirations is how you start a conversation and build coalition - through debate and conversation. Fourth, your point about Warren is beyond absurd, and again like typically disingenuous conservatives, cite zero evidence to support your claims.
LOL. She is a racist. If she were a Republican you would be calling her a racist for cultural appropriation. The left calls out 5 year olds for wearing Moana costumes on Halloween, but Warren gets a pass for falsifying her race to get ahead...hahahahha. She is a con, just one that says the things you like to hear.
How’s Virginia doing? Where are the protests to “believe victims?” The hypocrisy is absurd. Everyone sees it except the people plugged into VOX. Come one man!
BOTH parties suck. I believe AOC is actually genuine. She is wrong and ignorant, but genuine which is refreshing. Now we just need more genuine people with less ignorant more liberty enhancing ideas.
I mean, wow, I couldn't love this anymore than I do. You're so all over the place, you make blind squirrels wince. She didn't put on black face, she didn't embrace white nationalists, she didn't molest anyone, she didn't use racist or misogynistic language. What she did do is equate a family mythology as part of her story, one that she's been educated on why its wrong, but she never dressed as Pocahontas, or referenced anyone as such. If First Nations people can forgive, I will as well, but it has nothing to do with her advocacy. Your absurdly pollyannish search for Jesus on Earth, would be quaint if it weren't so insipid. As for Lt. Governor, again, I don't know what you're smoking, but it's skunk weed. Everyone has been demanding he resign. Oh, but you wanted to focus on GND, right?
She claimed to be “Native American”. Lol. Even if she believed her “family mythology” she obviously knew she was mostly white. She chose to identity Native American to advance her career.
Again, this is about GND, right?
Again, your misogyny is showing. You don't hold men to any standard, and expect women to bear Virgin Mary qualities.
Lmfao, you reverted to the misogynistic argument. Actually holding people to same standard would require that I criticize women when they do dumb shit no? Who says I don’t “hold men to any standards?”
You are correct that I do tend to get off topic...my bad.
GND is a facade to morally qualify a govt takeover of the private sector which is why many people reject it. It is morally rooted in a real problem -global warming. I cannot refute the goals above, just the motive and methodology.
Instead of pointing out every politician who's wrong how about pointing out ones who YOU SUPPORT? Afraid you might expose your real beliefs? Afraid others might go on the attack and you may find yourself the defender instead of the aggressor? You sit there and lob criticisms at everyone and everything. You have nothing positive to say, coming just close enough to pretend to not be a cynical nihilist . Prove it. Give us your picks, big guy.
Gary Johnson
He’s a terrible politician, but I agree with his views. On the left, Sinema. I don’t agree with everything she says, but she is above the bs and rhetoric and has mad integrity.
I also voted for Obama twice because thought he was what we needed after the Bush years. Now, I think we need a moderate who will unite the country more.
Obama was extremely moderate.
Amy Klobuchar is pretty moderate and very effective.
I can't wait to be unwilling to work!
Enjoy your bare minimum of existence.
I wouldn't call sipping drinks and watching all of this new green infrastructure be built the bare minimum of existence. Thanks for supporting my endeavors, though!
How you gonna afford those drinks?
My unwillingness to work check should afford me some iced tea, no?
After rent ? Doubt it.
I am very unwilling to work! When do I get the first payment on the Green Dream Plan? If I move to Chicago, may I also claim that nice 1,000 dollar bonus for doing nothing?
The first step to dealing with climate change may be the hardest: depoliticizing issues that shouldn't be political. Another step is restoring our corrupted language, defining accurately and meaningfully, for example, the term "socialism." In our current environment I don't have great hopes for either.
I don't believe many had problems with our massive federal funding of highways back in the '50s, intimately linked with defense (National Interstate and Defense Highways Act, etc.). It was this system that helped shape our dispersement and increase our carbon footprint.
Climate change is an economic problem.
Pollution (carbon emissions) is rewarded while sustainable energy is not. If gasoline was $20 / gal. there would be a lot more public transit. If it was $100 / gal. nobody would own car.
Economics is the reason why things are they way they are and are not the way they are not, which is why AOC is saying the economics must change.
Politics is all about economics and whoever is in control of politics (billionaires) defines the economics. The NYT has an editorial today titled "Abolish Billionaires". I'm astounded that the neoliberal propaganda rag even published it.
Yep, $2.58 per gallon does not create any incentive to innovate or change the mobility sector. We are at $6.69 per gallon apparently in the Netherlands but I wouldn't know since I don't drive but use public transport.
Haven't read the NYT article yet, but I find it strange that billionaires don't really pay all that much in taxes, yet they all have philanthropic organisations and "do" charity and are not accountable whatsoever, or if that money goes where it is needed most, who knows?
+++
Oil should be $200 a barrel and steak should cost $40 a pound.
Sustainable solutions are thought of as economically unfeasible only because deliberate policy decisions make destructive practices artificially cheap.
deliberate policy decisions make destructive practices artificially cheap and highly profitable
Bottom line, the AIA isn’t helping because they’re aren’t being critical. We’ve seen and discussed this relatively recently (links below). If they’re going to comment, they should take the time to really look behind curtains. It’s never been evident that they’re doing that in any of these instance, let alone this one. They need to make calculated responses like RIBA.
https://archinect.com/news/article/149977696/aia-releases-statement-on-2016-u-s-election-results-will-trump-s-relations-with-architects-change
https://archinect.com/news/article/149978583/aia-leaders-release-video-apology-for-statement-in-support-of-president-elect-trump
https://archinect.com/news/article/150040059/the-aia-responds-to-u-s-congress-tax-reform-bills-you-re-making-a-terrible-mistake
The AIA's approach is opportunistic, not proactive.
It must still be reeling from the flak after supporting Trump's infrastructure rhetoric. So, why not do a one-eighty and jump on the opposite bandwagon before fully comprehending it? Reactionary PR at its finest.
Again and again, those controlling the AIA in Washington DC have the institute take these political positions that may or may not reflect the majority of their membership.
For those who fear the word socialism, here's a historical primer.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
“We socialists are trying to save capitalism, and the damned capitalists won’t let us.”
At some point climate matters will hurt capitalism as it exists now, likely badly, and hurt us all. But cowboy capitalism is not able to plan for the future, rather can only think short term. Market share, profit statements, and stock prices of the moment determine much, as we saw in the housing mess of '08.
I'll toot my horn here. I put this up years ago: https://rggblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/under-the-rainbow-capitalismthe-subprime-mortgage-crash/
There are, of course, better sources.
I am interested in a bridge to Hawaii. Oh, Sandy get me another beer!
Organizations should not support politicians and their actions simply because they can not represent all their members. Individual support is something else and that is what should’ve been done here. We are all professionals, architects, after all and shouldn’t be drawn into the politics by anybody nor should anybody be speaking on our behalf.
Yes, you are correct.
^^^ This!
Dubravko I see your point, but: The AIA does require its members to adhere to Code of Ethics, so if the GND proposal hews to the intent of that Code then it *is* likely that this statement represents their members.
https://www.aia.org/press-releases/212521-aia-adopts-new-rules-and-ethical-standards-
Some sample language from it:
- When performing professional services, members shall make reasonable efforts to inform their clients of the potential environmental impacts or consequences the member reasonably believes may occur as a result of work performed on behalf of the clients (Rule 2.401).
- Energy conservation: members should set ambitious performance goals for greenhouse gas emission reduction with their clients for each project (Ethical Standard 6.1).
Where do we begin?
Show in the statement where the AIA supports a specific candidate? This is in line with their previous press releases on this issue. Some say it doesn't go far enough, and in that criticism, I concur.
Show me where Architects are required to be members. Show me why the profession should be controlled by a club.
Architects aren’t required to be members, Sneaky, and there are other architecture clubs, too. AIA is the leading one because the people who do join it work to make it so.
Oh, I'm very aware. I was taken to SARA meetings when I was a kid. I was bored to tears.
What a joke... I will be officially "unwilling to work" the day the GND goes into effect.
I can’t wait! I’m going to become a bird watcher.
Enjoy the pay cut.
did we already forget about he yellow vests :(
good to see she instills fear in you, it means the middle ages are coming to an end.
Well considering her the philosophy she adheres to has led to 100 million deaths...yeah I’m afraid.
HYPERBOLE HYPERBOLE HYPERBOLE RESPECT ME AS AN INDEPENDENT THINKER HYPERBOLE
IM A REVOLUTIONARY! I HAVE A QUE SHIRT THAT I BOUGHT AT SPENSERS IN THE MALL! AMERICA IS TOO HARD! GO AOC! FREE STUFF FREE STUFF FREE STUFF!
IM SO MAD I SPELLED CHE WRONG
can you tell me why are you personally so invested in the rich? are you rich? you hope to be rich? are the rich paying you to do their bid? capitalism as an ideology has killed orders of magnitude more people than any crazy communist, and if this is the only argument you have,(and the "other people's money" stupidity) you already lost.
I am not rich, and bounced around between poor and working class growing up. I am now middle class. Why? Because I don’t trust the government, despise identity politics and tribalism, love liberty, and despise populism, nationalism (an inevitable result of socialism), and know enough about history to see where this goes.
Ayn Rand acolyte ... probably Ann Coulter, too.
random, that’s because there are a lot of haters out there.
Yes, people who hate to pay their taxes or hate rich people paying their taxes ;-)
I'm a liberal green walking the talk, but I can't believe this organization signed on to such unworkable stupidity. Then again, LEED is a thing instead of passive house, so no surprise.
In a bizarre twist: The ASLA will NOT be endorsing the New Green Deal, possibly due to confusion.
On second thought, it's not so bizarre. The ASLA and AIA often seem to have differing "visions."
Wow. I’m surprised. Maybe the pot is clarifying their vision.
This is going to be a very long campaign season.
anyone who says that trump doesn’t make it entertaining is a liar. He is funny. An asshole, but funny like a WWF villain.
3-2-1-triggered! Lol
Especially when he switched from calling Ted Cruz “lying Ted” to “beautiful Ted” just because he started sucking up to him. Lmfao. He’s Like a 5th grader.
So fucking entertaining. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/a-second-migrant-child-died-in-u-s-custody-this-month-heres-what-we-know
"funny like a WWF villain." Is such a callous and privileged thing to say when people are literally sick, dying, or in the streets because of policy decisions this administration has made.
A very, very, very long season.
tduds, thats didn’t start with trump and will not end with Warren or anyone else. Obama did many of the same things. Trump is an honest representation of our policies. In other words, his rhetoric matches our nations actions, and exposes some nasty realities, which is why he really stokes so much anger from the establishment. This country prefers to have a bullshitter and chief. That neither excuses his actions, or makes him more Nobel, just more of an honest reflection of what happens behind the facade.
More Manson and less Bundy if you get my point...Many people find him entertaining. This is a big part of why he won. Don’t underestimate that. Moral of the story, if the dems want to win don’t run another dull wet towel.
When he roasts other politicians it gives people joy. This is my observation. Even a super villain like Kim Jung Un can be humorous in a terrible over the top way. In character over content.
To that first point...look how butthurt the dems are about calling it a wall vs a barrier. They love love love soft language. See Carlin
Thank you for that, tduds. You're fighting the good fight here but some people flat out don't have the ability to empathize.
because of policy decisions this administration has made
because of policy decisions every administration for the past 40 years has made
There, fixed it for you.
++++
First of all, the idea that encouraging illegal migration is compassionate is absolutely not true. It is a dangerous journey, and people should be discouraged from attempting it. Especially with kids. Especially in winter or summer months. The politicians don’t care. They are exploiting the issue. Obama and all those before him didn’t have policies that were all too much better. The rhetoric of trump is bad, and his policies have somewhat made the situation worse, but in no way was Obama’s immigrantion policy any better. They used to call him “deporter and chief” Gary Johnson’s policy was actually very radical. I know he was a dope, but his policies were actually good. Make LEGAL immigrantion so easy and inexpensive that any reasonable person wouldn’t attempt to make that dangerous trek. Then we don’t need wall. Coyotes (who do abuse people) go out of business. Drug smugglers and criminals are exposed by removing the hay stack of mostly good people. Simple solution. Instead, we have bs politicians talking about abolishing ICE and encouraging people to journey through the desert in freezing temperatures with small children from their elitist enclaves. Foh.
Typing from phone sorry for typos...
These self interested leftists are giving poor people from other places false hopes and encouraging them to put themselves and their children in harms way. This is all done for political and social points, and by many because they are just regurgitating what they believe/hear is morally just. Once here in the US, it is also NOT compassionate to have an undocumented underclass that struggles to find work, is afraid to call police for help, etc. Compassion would be to let people in legally and provide safe transportation systems in collaboration with other nations. That’s compassionate.
Also, I wasn’t talking about that shit being funny tduds. I was talking about him mocking and roasting other politicians. I guess I can compartmentalize that from the rest of him in a way similar to how you compartmentalize Obama’s feel good speeches from his drone strike policies that have killed many civilians.
You guys I'm not going to get into a long argument about this again (jla-x, I skim you, so if you're making a new point direct me to it), but yes, both sides do shitty things, but some things are shittier than others, and if the only way you work to make things better is to shit on both sides from the internet then you're not only not helping, you're making it worse.
+++I agree with that Donna :)
Please don't assume the average twitter leftist speaks for me. I was and still am plenty critical of Obama. I only criticize you on the dumb shit you personally say, I'd ask you extend a similar courtesy to me.
I’ll try, but You should follow your own advice.
Stop trying to reason with Libertarians on the internet? Yeah I should.
Libertarians are immune to reason and logic, as well as the fundamental contradictions inherent in their beliefs.
Problem: Trump
Solution: Give Trump vast new powers.
How does this follow?
So where does our President Bates get off saying we, as an organization, support the Green New Deal. He didn't ask me! I find the whole thing to ridiculous to even consider talking about, and the fact he's giving it our endorsement makes us all look stupid ! This thing is never going to happen. There isn't enough money in the world to pay for it ! I thought we, as an organization, were smarter than this. I guess not ! Didn't we learn anything from the stack of lies given to us years ago by Al Gore? We got bigger problems then worrying about global cooling, warming, climate change, or whatever the title is tomorrow to fit the liberal narrative. I'm not willing to wreck our economy on some "pie in the sky" notion you are ever going to change anything.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.