(February 2, 2018 at 5:14 am)Khemikal Wrote: Yes, I get that you'll take solar over coal..and the -world- has chosen dirty solar over cleaner solar. Now you've got a chub for more environmental regs? Whatever happened to libertarianism? You're telling me it's not possible..but, ofc, with strong regs and an educated populace....it is. That's how you approach practical sustainability, by doing what would actually work instead of half assing the job and hoping that someday, somehow, better tech will eliminate bad actors. That will never happen, because bad actors will use better tech to be bad actors. Case in point..solar.
What is dirty solar? Is this a serious problem?
I think I've been pretty clear about my position on Libertarianism. Right now there are a huge amount of negative externalities that corporations aren't incorporating into their cost of business. That is a failure of the free market, and the government's role should be to force companies to internalize those costs. In the case of North America, this absolutely means more environmental regulations.
You can't have a libertarian system that isn't screwing people unless you have this. Without regulations, you're harming other people with negative environmental externalities, so you're not bearing the cost of your own business. So I don't support that. If you internalize those costs, though, I'd rather have private actors seeking a profit within those bounds. It's not a matter of fighting about whether we should always have more or less regulation - I think there is the right about, that properly structures a market so it's fair. We're not there in some countries in some industries, so I'd support more regulation there. In other industries, I think there is too much government involvement, so I'd support less regulation or subsidy.
As for an educated populous... yes, of course I support that. Doesn't mean that that's the direction America is heading, unfortunately.
