Biden-Harris Administration Announces $15.5 Billion to Support a Strong and Just Transition to Electric Vehicles, Retooling Existing Plants, and Rehiring Existing Workers - eviltoast
  • roguetrick@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We will always give money to our industries to make up for the lack of long term planning in our system. I certainly do not understand what concept of fucking justice that is related to.

    • FlowVoid@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      I certainly do not understand what concept of fucking justice that is related to.

      This concept of justice:

      higher scores will be given to projects that are likely to retain collective bargaining agreements and/or those that have an existing high-quality, high-wage hourly production workforce, such as applicants that currently pay top quartile wages in their industry.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        And that’s good. But what would be better for the planet would be building up a public transportation system so robust that cars are unnecessary outside of rural areas.

        • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I was just listening to a Parenti lecture where he talked about an interaction he had with someone who had been in high up in East Germany. He basically asked, “why did you put out those crappy little two cylinder engine cars?” And the ex-officials response was essentially, “we didn’t want to put them into cars at all, we thought if we provided an adequate public transportation system, that people would be satisfied, but they weren’t so we had to do what we could.”

          I agree with you fully, that public transport would be the ideal solution, far and away above electric vehicles, which just providing one for every household in the US would require such s massive amount of material extraction that it by itself will cause significant climate outcomes, but, we must find a way around the impulse for private personal transportation that exists within people, and I don’t know how to do so. Moving without the mass of people could lead to rejection and reactionary movements. Moving with the mass will lead to climate destruction. How do we work with the masses to come to a compromise that allows the support of the masses, while reducing the number of private vehicles to nearly zero?

    • wagoner@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Maybe as a miniscule offset to the ungodly sums still being spent to prop up the fossil fuel industry.