[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
The alleged economic opportunity created by CO2 restriction is a little like toll collector jobs created by setting up toll booths on existing highways. Sure those said "jobs" are created. Sure, some businesses on alternative routes may even benefit as people have to take detours to avoid the tolls, but all those "jobs" are created directly at the expense of people having to take those detours or pay tolls. In Frederick Bastiat's words, those government interventions are "negative bridges": instead of normal bridges that bring commerce and exchanges together improving lives on both sides of the trade, those "negative bridges" and "negative railroads" put up barriers to exchanges and make lives worse off on both sides of the artificial divide.
I'm not against reducing local pollutions that have measurable health harm, however CO2 control is one of those global static nonsenses that may well harm local environmental improvement. Resources available to humanity are always limited; when resources are forced to be put towards one endeavor, other goals are neglected. I'm not at all convinced that global CO2 level is a more worthy goal than fighting local air/water pollution, improving living standards or even feeding and electrifying much of the third world. Considering that the vast majority of the global electricity generation is done by coal, which is by far the least expensive source, and electrification is instrumental in sanitation, education and voluntary birth rate decline by parents (giving them something else to do for half of the 24hr cycle), the whole CO2 restriction agenda, if carried out, is destined to condemn a vast cross-section of humanity on planet earth to abject poverty and strife . . . hence very much a crime against humanity.
Historical changes in climate tend to be quite rapid. Tree ring records reflect that, and so do historical chronicles of fall of sendantary empires. It's wishful thinking to expect some kind of global mega bureaucracy planning new adaptations through some carbon credits would at all work to the benefit of humanity in coping with those drastic changes, instead of getting in the way by curbing economic and scientific/technology growth. Much of the AGW research is already reflecting what happens when government monopolistic research funding produces: vast frauds and scholarsticist debates on how many angels can dance on the tip of a pin, just like when the Church funded research back in medieval Europe. Such non-market-driven and non-scientifically-provable "research" topics provide a reliable stream of cash subsidy for the established "peers" in the mutual review process.
posted by 76.118.39...
, Fri, 4 Feb 2011 17:11:03, Sat, 5 Feb 2011 07:10:28, Sat, 5 Feb 2011 11:50:28
, Thu, 3 Feb 2011 18:27:38
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
