Mr. Tingus,
China and the rest of East Asia is growing at 6%, well in excess of the US. It's true that the US managed to achieve 3% growth in 2018, above Europe for example. But I don't think any economists disagree that a $1.5 trillion tax cut can boost the economy in the short run; the question is what will be the longer term costs. -- JF

Mr. Tingus,
China and the rest of East Asia is growing at 6%, well in excess of the US. It's true that the US managed to achieve 3% growth in 2018, above Europe for example. But I don't think any economists disagree that a $1.5 trillion tax cut can boost the economy in the short run; the question is what will be the longer term costs. -- JF

Edoardo Cattaneo,
Thank you for your comments.
I am in favor of increased government spending on infrastructure and effective environmental programs, like research. And, yes, it can and should be financed by taxation (unlike in 2009, when the macroeconomy needed the fiscal stimulus). But (1) government spending can't be the whole package to address climate change; (2) a carbon tax should be the main policy instrument; and (3) the language AOC has used in the Green New Deal was very unrealistic in suggesting that we can eliminate non-renewable energy sources completely (evidently within 10 years!). It's great that wind and solar have expanded; but until technology has come up with a far better means of energy storage, wind and solar can't supply 100% of energy. The plan should have left roles, not just for a carbon tax, but also for such contributors to mitigation as CCS.

You cite the example of Europe. Germany was unrealistic in shutting down its nuclear power plants while counting on solar and wind power to make up the difference. The predictable result was a renewed reliance on coal and more carbon emissions.
JF

So one commentator says my proposals are just the status quo, while another says they have zero chance of being enacted! The truth is that these are sensible practical proposals, most of which are situated on the front lines of the see-sawing conflict between Democratic politicians and Republican politicians. Lately the latter have been rolling back health insurance, financial regulation, and much more. These policies are eminently winnable and eminently losable. In some presidential election years, for example, a few thousand votes in the right states could make the difference.
JF

Right, they can't get through the current Congress. But did you get that the list of policies was explicitly proposed as part of a Democratic election-year campaign to take back the House? It could well happen. Maybe the Senate too, but less likely, of course. It could certainly happen if people turn out to vote and pay attention to what policies/politicians they are voting for.
JF