RE: Conservative/Libertarian economics and anthropic global warming
May 8, 2011 at 11:42 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2011 at 11:54 pm by theVOID.)
(May 8, 2011 at 4:48 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: It’s been my experience that many conservatives and libertarians deny anthropic global warming. I believe this line of thinking is affected by belief bias with its roots in objections to proposed policies that would limit emissions of greenhouse gasses. I this thread I would like to discuss not the science of anthropic warming, that has been discussed in other threads, but the economic consequences of man-man climate change and how that effects the basic precept of property rights.
In his paper TAKING PROPERTY RIGHTS SERIOUSLY: THE CASE OF CLIMATE CHANGE, libertarian lawyer Jonathan H. Adler argues the point that the do nothing attitude about climate change currently favored by conservatives and libertarians is a serious transgression against the property rights of those who stand to lose the most economically from such change. In the paper he concludes that advocates of free market environmentalism (FME) need to adjust their thinking.
I agree with that, I've held this position for some time, environmental damage effects property rights and our right to life, as such the government has a role in preventing the thwarting of rights, though I don't believe government are going to come up with a solution nor is their proposed method of planned development going to be the best use of resources for solving the problems and that the demand for resource efficiency as energy prices rise and fossil fuel reserves are depleted is going to be the main driving force behind any change - As such the best policy would be to remove taxes on efficient consumer and commercial goods making them more viable.
The government has a role to prevent someone else from 'dirtying my shit' as Freidman put it, Because it is unfeasible for individuals to seek compensation for the cost imposed upon them the government have a responsibility to enforce the rights of others in penalizing or dismantling institutions that thwart such rights.
(May 8, 2011 at 6:08 pm)Minimalist Wrote: When Void shows up.....it's the middle of the fucking night in New Zealand I guess....he'll explain all about how the invisible hand of the market will save us from global warming if we just let crooked corporations steal everything that isn't nailed down.
His invisible hand of the market is a lot like the theists invisible sky-daddy....although he denies that!!
The 'invisible hand' is nothing more than people pursing their own interests and capital being most efficiently used to cater to the greatest demand, that rather than the government planning the economy in such a way as to suit the agenda of elected officials with a 'we know best' elitist attitude we should let people pursue their own ends and only intervene to stop them imposing their will on others or punishing them if they do so.
It has absolutely nothing in common with a top-down designer approach such as God, it is instead the idea that central planning and enforced authority should take place that more resembles the proposed role of God in evolution.
Your thinking that all corporations do is steal stuff is bullshit, it stems from your sense of entitlement. You are only entitled to your life, your property and to freely pursue your goals so long as you don't do so by imposing your will on others - If you are free to do that then nobody is "stealing" from you.
The way you use the word 'steal' is to rob it of all real meaning, stealing is the removal of property from your possession against your will. If you really think that is happening to you then go take them to court and stop bitching on the internet about it.
.
