But, I thought there was no climate change…so what’s the issue?
In the video, she is very preachy and bossy sounding, holier than thou, just like many socialists are.
It really says a lot about the people in her district who have elected her. They’ve elected someone who sounds like they have the real world experience of a 15 year old girl who “knows everything”.
I this she is consistent with her position.
Selectively applied, this could be a good idea.
Me. For a small fee.
We, and not just you.
No, under my plan, a huge government bureaucracy will vet applicants, very similarly to the process under which, in my day, applicants for a government security clearance were variably vetted.
Then, after this, and based on the classifications arising from the background investigations, I will select who gets to reproduce. For a small fee. This should make my latter years even more solvent.
How does a small fee to you pay for a huge govt program?
HOW do you enforce it? Forced abortion? Forced sterilization? Promoting homosexual relationships?
It doesn’t. I keep the fee. You think I’m gonna do this as some sort of public service?
No. The government only issues procreation certificates, IAW my selections. Any others who conceive are enemies of the state and will be dealt with through appropriate, punitive measures. Fines would likely be involved.
So long as I get my (repeated) small fees, the petty details can be worked out in committee. I’m a big picture problem solver. Like the New Green Deal folks.
A Modest Proposal. Some may have heard of other such, historically.
Well, since according to her the end is most likely just twelve years away, I don’t think it makes much difference.
I listened to the entire video clip of AOC talking about climate change, and it does not appear to me that she is suggesting the people shouldn’t have children. The most she said is that the situation can lead young people to question if they should have kids. She is commenting on what she thinks others might be thinking. That is a subtle but significant difference between that and commenting on what others should be thinking. The “should” aspect of her comment is an interpretation and that is not totally justified by the words themselves. To that extent, the headline of the Daily Wire story in the OP is misleading.
It is like commenting on how, during the recession of 2008, many people put off having kids because of the uncertainty over how they will care for them. (Research here.) When the Pew Research Center comments like this, no one is accusing them of recommending reducing births. So why accuse AOC of recommending this when she is making essentially the same argument, but with climate change instead of financial insecurity?
Another misleading headline, and for about the same reason as the Daily Wire headline. Look at what AOC actually said:
And it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: is it okay to still have children?
And now look at the Fox News headline:
Ocasio-Cortez says there is a ‘legitimate question’ that needs to be asked: ‘Is it okay to still have children?’
Notice the difference? Fox News added the word “needs”. This is very significant because it implies a value judgement on the part of AOC. It implies AOC states young people should not have children in the face of climate change. What AOC actually said implies that young people are being led to ask that question. AOC said nothing about whether they should ask that question, but the Fox News headline wants you to think she does hold that position. The statement by AOC was not about having children. It was about climate change. And the comment about having children was AOC’s expression of what questions climate change is making people ask, just like how this Pew Research Center’s report is an expression of what decisions the 2008 financial crisis brought about. Again, the Pew Research Center was not recommending that people have fewer kids during a recession. But that is how Fox News would have reported it.