this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
352 points (93.3% liked)

World News

32323 readers
858 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When I first read the titile, I thought that the US is going to have to build A LOT to triple global production. Then it occured to me that the author means the US is pledging to make deals and agreements which enable other countries to build their own. Sometimes I think the US thinks too much of itself and that's also very much part of American branding.

Where are my renewable bros at? Tell me this is bad.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Bill Clinton used to do this. Set goals and agreements that were like 30 years away. He did this alot. This is not new and is basically a way to look like you are doing something, but you and your administration would be long gone before there can be any accountability.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Tbf, long term goals are a good thing. National planning having a lifespan of 4-8 years is fucking insane, and probably contributes non-trivial to federal expenditures and waste. We'd be better off if we could follow long term goals. But you're right, though, it was performative planning by and large.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Actual genuine question here. Has any US administration made a decades long plan like this, announced it to the public, and then a future administration saw said plan through to fruition?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I believe both exiting Iraq and Afghanistan qualify.

Maybe not exactly what you're getting at though

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That qualifies.Thanks you!

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)