Talk:Green New Deal/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

GND as an international idea

Should this article have a less US-centric focus? The beginning sentence states: "The Green New Deal (GND) is a proposed package of United States legislation that aims to address climate change and economic inequality.". The Green New Deal was a concept that predated the legislation, created by a British Green New Deal group, and apparently the policy promoted by the Global Greens since 2011. The article also has a substantial focus on the US GND in it's content page; I propose the US GND be split off into a dedicated "Green New Deal in the United States" page. Catiline52 (talk) 07:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I think that is probably a good idea, I would support that @Catiline52:Sadads (talk) 01:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

The Green New Deal has a clear provenance. Its origins, both as a political term and as a body of political thought, traces to 2007-08. The principal individuals who were originally involved can be reviewed at this site -- . I personally, as a US Green activist, recall many conversations during the global recession of 2008 where Greens discussed the response politics put forward by the UK "Green New Deal Group". The Green New Deal had multiple originators in multiple countries after 2008. It would not be appropriate, in tracing the origins/provenance and development of the Green New Deal to 'split off' a dedicated 'Green New Deal in the United States' page. Better would be to follow the chronology, and give weight to the origins and follow on of multiple countries, perhaps alphabetically, since there are many countries who have versions of the original UK Green New Deal Group's formal proposal (see their PDF )... Greenalot (talk) 00:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Catiline52: Weak support I'm ok with this, but the international section is very lacking. Re-writing the lead may be better? ping me when responding, gràcies! TheKaloo talk 18:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

References

I would second this - introduction section for sure needs to be moderated as it is strongly US centric. - I can contribute to the Canadian and EU sections though think that is not possible right now because the page is listed as an ECP page (rightfully so). :@Catiline52: :@TheKaloo: :@Sadads: :@Greenalot: (MarcusLeland (talk) 17:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC))

I'm removing the banner tag for this as it's six months old and there has been no discussion since September. FWIW though I support the Split providing someone has time to do the work to action it while making both articles coherent. This makes it 4:1 in favour. So unless more opposition arrives, if anyone does have the time to perform it, they could go ahead without further discussion. In the mean time, I'll update & make a minor internationalising edit to the lede to partially address the concern here. FeydHuxtable (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Small typo correction

Sorry if this the wrong place for suggestion, but "European Union" in the second sentence of the second paragraph of the main article is currently in lowercase (I don't have edit privileges).

Done , thanks for pointing that out. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

edit extended-protected

I would like to add more information on the Green New Deal policy in South Korea. However, the page is extended confirmed protection, so I have no access to edit the page. I would like to request edits to this page. I am very new to wikipedia, so please help me out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suhrj (talk • contribs) 07:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

​You can suggest edits here on this talk page, just add "Please change X to Y", citing reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Please add the paragraphs under 3.International >> 3.4 South Korea. (Add them under the previous content.)

On July 4th 2020, the Korean government announced the Korean New Deal. The Korean New Deal revolves around three pillars: the Digital New Deal, a measure to promote digital innovation throughout the country's economy, the Green New Deal, a measure to accelerate a transition towards environmental-friendly and low-carbon economy, and strengthened social safety nets, a measure to lay the groundwork for an inclusive society. The Korean New Deal is a the government's "declaration of its transition to becoming a leading country from a country that has trailed behind, from a carbon-dependent economy to a low-carbon economy, and from an unequal society to an inclusive society." The top 10 flagship projects chosen to bring changes and play pivotal roles in the early stage are Data Dam, artificial intelligence governments, smart medical infrastructure, green remodeling, green energy, eco-friendly future mobility, green smart school, digital twin, SOC digitalization, and smart green industrial complexes. [1]

The Green New Deal of the Korean New Deal is a plan that pursues a net-zero society and a plan to transform its economic foundation into a low-carbon and eco-friendly one. There are three projects in the Green New Deal. First, the government will carry out green renovation of cities, spaces, and public buildings by transforming public facilities into zero-energy buildings, to recover the green ecosystem of the territory, the ocean, and the cities, and to develop systems for better water management. The second project is to set up smart grids to efficiently manage energy and to expand low-carbon, distributed energy, to establish the foundation for renewable deployment, and to expand the distribution of green mobility such as electric vehicles and hydrogen vehicles. Lastly, the government will foster promising companies which will lead the green businesses and will develop low-carbon, green industrial complexes in order to establish an innovative ecosystem for the green industry. Also, the government will lay the groundwork for green innovation including R&D and finance.

The total spending on the Green New Deal by 2025 is targeted at 73.4 trillion won. It is expected to create 659,000 jobs. [2]

[1] Moon's Korean New Deal Targets 1.9 million new jobs, 2020, Korea JoonAng Daily https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2020/07/31/englishStudy/currentIssues/THINK-ENGLISH-0720-New-Deal/20200731103000345.html [2] 「The Korean Newe Deal」, 2020.7.14, ROK government, The Korean New Deal national reporting meeting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suhrj (talk • contribs) 05:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Not done: There is enough for a new article about the Korean New Deal that including it in this one would be distracting. This article is already overloaded and a split request exists. Once a Korean New Deal article is available, then linking it from the "South Korea" as a "see also" headnote would be appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I see your point. However, many experts and interested parties in the country are frequently pointing out that information in this article has to be updated. The information there is data before the election, so there has to be a major update. I do not know who originally wrote the current post on South Korea, so I cannot simply ask you to delete it. If it was you User talk:Þjarkur or Eggishorn, I would like to ask you to delete the current content and replace it with the following. I've shortened my previous request. I hope it is short enough to make it not too distracting.

On July 4th 2020, the Korean government announced the Korean New Deal which revolves around three pillars: the Digital New Deal, the Green New Deal, , and strengthened social safety nets. It is the government's "declaration of its transition to becoming a leading country from a country that has trailed behind, from a carbon-dependent economy to a low-carbon economy, and from an unequal society to an inclusive society." [1] The total spending on the Green New Deal by 2025 is targeted at 73.4 trillion won. It is expected to create 659,000 jobs. [2]

The three major tasks involved in the Green New Deal are:

 ·green transition of infrastructure
 ·low-carbon and decentralized energy
 ·innovation in green industries  

<citing> [1] Moon's Korean New Deal Targets 1.9 million new jobs, 2020, Korea JoonAng Daily https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2020/07/31/englishStudy/currentIssues/THINK-ENGLISH-0720-New-Deal/20200731103000345.html [2] 「The Korean Newe Deal」, 2020.7.14, ROK government, The Korean New Deal national reporting meeting

 Not done Eggishorn is correct. A new page would be better rather than adding even more stuff here. You could make it yourself if you want. GreenFrogsGoRibbit (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Inconsistent grammar in Supporters section

Fix grammar in supporters section for consistency. For example:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, US Representative from New York's 14th congressional district > Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, US Representative from New York's 14th congressional district.

Alcee Hastings, US Representative from Florida's 20th Congressional District. > Alcee Hastings, US Representative from Florida's 20th congressional district.

Rashida Tlaib, US Representative from Michigan's 13th congressional district. > [no change] Woodopal (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for the heads, up Woodopal. Let us know if you find any more grammar stuff to fix. GreenFrogsGoRibbit (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Connolly is from VA district 11

Change the listed congressional district for representative Gerald Connolly from 10 to 11. He is the representative from the 11th district. Possiblysasha (talk) 02:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Section organization of AOC plan and Biden plan and miscellaneous minor corrections

(1) Should the sections about the AOC plan and the Biden plan relating to the Green New Deal not be subsections of the United States section instead of subsections of the By country or region section? Given that the AOC plan has such extensive currently sub-subsection coverage in this article that would not be covered in the index if the current AOC plan subsection was a sub-subsection of the currently placed United States subsection, should each country just be its own section (Australia as section 3, Canada as section 4, the EU as section 5, etc) and not a subsection of the By country or region section so that the United States section could contain the AOC plan as a subsection and all of the AOC plan’s current sub-subsections as instead sub-subsections of the United States section within the AOC plan subsection? For clarity, this is my proposed organization of this article’s sections:

  1 History
     1.1 Proposals to include the Green New Deal in recovery program from COVID-19
  2 Environmental justice
  3 Australia
  4 Canada
  5 European Union
  6 South Korea
  7 United Kingdom
  8 United States
     8.1 Early efforts
     8.2 The Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Markey Green New Deal
        8.2.1 Background
        8.2.2 Green New Deal Resolution
        8.2.3 House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
        8.2.4 January 2019 letter to Congress from environmental groups
        8.2.5 Criticism
        8.2.6 Supporters
        8.2.7 Detractors
        8.2.8 Legislative outcome
        8.2.9 2020 Presidential Campaign
     8.3 The Biden climate plan
  9 See also
  10 References
  11 External links
     11.1 Projects referred to as "Green New Deal"
     11.2 Green New Deal proposal in 116th Congress

This organization of sections would match the precedent of section followed by articles such as 2020 United States Senate elections where the discussion of how the topic is applied over a geographic region is given its own section instead of being a subsection of a theoretical section called By state such as how this article creates a section called By country or region. This reorganization would place the AOC plan and the Biden plan relating to the Green New Deal under the United States section where they should go instead of the current section organization that seems to imply that the AOC plan and the Biden plan are countries or regions.

(2) In section 3.7.8 of the current article (section 8.2.9 in my proposal of the section organization), the title is currently misspelled as "Legistrative outcome". It should say "Legislative outcome".

(3) There is an unnecessary extra line break between the Biden plan section and the See also section that should be deleted. I would do all of these things if I could edit this article.

Nicolás Macri (talk) 19:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Done. Thanks so much for taking the time to clearly specify those excellent improvements. FeydHuxtable (talk) 09:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Democrat leader council labeled conservative?

Article labels Dlc conservative. Not supported by cited article. Center-left would be better description.

Read further and American Action Network called center-right. Am very confused how DLC and PPI were listed as conservative in this and AAN was called center-right.

If you examine the articles on these three groups, the characterizations are quite accurate. The Democratic Leadership Council is the conservative pro-corporate (they claim to be "moderate") Democratic establishment group; the Progressive Policy Institute is their think tank. (By global standards, there is no center-left in the American Democratic Party.) And the American Action Network is a moderate (i.e., center-right) Republican group. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:50, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

By that standard the AAN would almost certainly be considered a far right group as a brief visit to their website clearly shows.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 July 2021

Add a section to the "Green New Deal Resolution" sub-article as follows:

On April 20, 2021, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Markey reintroduced the Green New Deal Resolution at the National Mall. The resolution reaffirms the threat produced by climate change and the responsibility of the US to recommit to meeting the emission goals outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Also, to add a section to the "The Biden climate plan" sub-article as follows:

President Biden’s infrastructure package, which pledges to halve the U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, has been criticized by progressives, including Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, as not being ambitious enough to achieve the scale required to mitigate climate change. Biden’s climate plan also outlined an American Jobs and Families Plan, which would lead to the creation of a Civilian Climate Corps.

Sandbox page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:CEGarcia001/Green_New_Deal?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template CEGarcia001 (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Done , allthough I added a new L3 section for the re-introduction, otherwise it might not be clear that various earlier sections refer just to the original AOC & Markey GND. Thanks for drafting these useful updates. FeydHuxtable (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 July 2021

The Global Green New Deal, under United Nations Environment Programme and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, expands the New Deal policies of President Roosevelt by emphasizing a more global and sustainable approach (Reference 1). The Global Green Deal introduces the idea of an an economy that is globally inclusive yet also collectively mitigating climate change (Reference 2).

The United Nations pushes to achieve this goal by encouraging investment in renewable energy at a global level which will be helpful in creating new jobs, increasing economic output, and fighting climate change (reference 3). In addition, United Nations advocates for its G20 members to invest in additional sectors that promote environmental health while also providing financial assistance to other developing countries (Reference 4).

References:

1.United Nations. “UN-DESA Policy Brief No. 12.” United Nations- Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Mar. 2009, sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/policybrief12.pdf. 2. Gallagher, Kevin P., and Richard Kozul-Wright. “A New Multilateralism for Shared Prosperity.” United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, unctad.org/system/files/official-document/gp_ggnd_2019_en.pdf. 3.United Nations. “A Global Green New Deal for Climate, Energy, and Development.” United Nations- Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Dec. 2009, sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/cc_global_green_new_deal.pdf. 4. United Nations. “Global Green New Deal.” UN Environment Programme , Sept. 2009, wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7736/-Global%20Green%20New%20Deal_%20An%20Update%20for%20the%20G20%20Pittsburgh%20Summit-2009880.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y. ArmanKaur11 (talk) 04:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Done , allthough I reworded a bit to make it clearer we're talking about proposals rather than actual implemented policy, plus made a few other changes. Great idea to have a section on the international version. Thanks for this and sorry we kept you waiting a bit. FeydHuxtable (talk)