1. I accept that I am under the control of a higher power (Muppet).

Libertarian take on climate change

Yes, I know some of you are climate skeptics. But if the chance of mainstream science being right is only 20% (and assuredly it is much higher than that), we still have, in expected value terms, a massive tort. We don’t let people play involuntary Russian roulette on others with a probability of 17% (one bullet, six chambers), so we do need to worry about man-made global warming.

http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/03/11/tyler-cowen/the-paradox-of-libertarianism/
Permalink  
March 12th, 2007 12:49pm
What's the expected payoff of valuing your morality based on the idea of expected payoff?
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 12:51pm
Do you want to put the money into asteroid defense or climate change?  We're not solving all the problems, so how do you propose to decide which ones are "most moral?"  (ps. how's the heat in your carbon neutral dung-burning thach hut?)

http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/Default.aspx?ID=728
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 12:56pm
"if the chance of mainstream science being right is only 20%"

I don't agree. I say it is lower. Much lower. And I've got the studies to prove it.
Permalink Scientist 
March 12th, 2007 1:00pm
> Do you want to put the money into asteroid defense
> or climate change?

As a libertarian it's immoral for you take any money from me for these communistic purposes. If people want to be saved then the free market will find a solution. And it doesn't, we don't deserve to live.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 1:00pm
It's easy to argue against it if you get to make up both sides don't you.  Here is Tyler Cowen, who's Libertarian credentials are not under question, in Cato Unbound:

"Defining property rights in clean air, or in a regular climate, isn’t that easy and it probably cannot be done without significant state intervention of some kind or another."

I don't know what you're for here.  You don't buy into his logic in the OP?  You're just spitting?
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 1:04pm
> without significant state intervention of some kind or another

That's what every statist left-wing one worlder thinks. It's just a different cause. Stealing the product of my labor is immoral no matter your EV calculation spits out or what your cause of the day demands.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 1:07pm
> valuing your morality based on the idea of expected payoff?

What do you value your morality on? God or faith or the feeling of what is right?

(serious replies, only. :)
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 12th, 2007 1:09pm
Do you have another proposal for climate change or a non-statist way to create clean air property rights?
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 1:10pm
> way to create clean air property rights?

People should self organize to solve problems. The power of the government should be strictly limited. What matters if the are is clean if we are slaves? And you know how pathetic the government is. You give all this power and money to them and they will just be inefficient, wasteful and corrupt. People should solve their own problems. Pull themselves up by their bootstraps. You can't go crying to the government every time there's a problem.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 1:16pm
> You can't go crying to the government every time there's a problem.

Problem is you can tell this for all the problems. I agree with you that we should do what we can to reduce the warming. But don't you see a disconnect? When we blame the government for everything, talk about it like we can't do anything, more people feel it's our responsibility on this one issue compared to many others.

Without government's help, people have always been helping through various organizations and even on their own. But is any other problem which have invoked so much feeling of responsibility on people part?
Permalink Send private email Senthilnathan N.S. 
March 12th, 2007 1:34pm
> But don't you see a disconnect?

If we are slaves nothing else matters. You would be violating my rights. Let the private market break the chains of pollution. Government is the problem. More government isn't the solution.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 1:40pm
This is son thinking she is mocking Libertarian reasoning, but it actually turns out to be son mocking the way son argues everything.
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 1:42pm
> Government is the problem. More government isn't the solution.

It's coming circular again. You don't say how the global warming is a unique problem which needs such a treatement compared to others.

If all problems are treated that way, then it follows that the government isn't needed, where we reach an impasse.
Permalink Send private email Senthilnathan N.S. 
March 12th, 2007 1:47pm
> You don't say how the global warming is a unique problem

It's not. That's why the government shouldn't use their monopoly on force to force us to inefficiently solve the problem. Let the free market handle it.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 1:49pm
zed,

Try to say something profound and useful rather than mock other people all the time :)
Permalink Send private email Rick, try writing better English 
March 12th, 2007 2:39pm
>> Defining property rights in clean air, or in a regular climate, isn’t that easy and it probably cannot be done without significant state intervention of some kind or another. <<

It seems pretty clear-cut to me.  Pollution is assault on your neighbors.  So make sure your paper mill or plastics factory has zero enviromental impact, either by simply not having any emissions, or by capturing the emissions and selling them to someone who wants them.
Permalink xampl 
March 12th, 2007 2:40pm
Awww, crazy gay hate chinaman, are you pissed at me?

I left some posts of substance

http://www.crazyontap.com/topic.php?TopicId=16636#195057

http://www.crazyontap.com/topic.php?TopicId=16636#195067


SoP is just giving circular psuedo-libertarian pablum.  I called her on it.
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 2:43pm
> Pollution is assault on your neighbors.

You probably see racism, and poverty, and health care as an assault on your neighbors too? I bet you would like to see the government solve those problems too?
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 2:44pm
Do you agree that if we require zero emissions, we need a court system that recognizes and enforces that?  I can imagine the free market refusing to buy things from those producers who pollute, but I can't get much beyond imagination.  It seems more plausible that a legislature will pass stronger clean air laws.  But maybe that's just my slave mind at work....
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 2:45pm
Don't you think using "chinaman" is a bit too much? (I don't care either way but not all chinese are kind like me :)

Anyway here is my contribution:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=lockean+proviso&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

SoP is only mocking the "libertarians" who don't appreciate how much they have is due to luck or help from the governments they hate so much.
Permalink Send private email Rick, try writing better English 
March 12th, 2007 3:00pm
>> You probably see racism, and poverty, and health care as an assault on your neighbors too? <<

Racism: Bad, but not something government ought to be involved in.

Poverty: Many Libertarians feel that government is the root cause of poverty by imposing onorous taxes, sponsoring a culture of entitlement, and discouraging micro-entrepreneurship.

Health Care: I have no opinion yet.
Permalink Send private email xampl 
March 12th, 2007 3:53pm
"SoP is only mocking the "libertarians" who don't appreciate how much they have is due to luck or help from the governments they hate so much."

Who is she arguing against? Or is she just cluttering up the thread with preemptive mockery of a simple-minded Libertarian who might wander into this thread in the future?
Permalink zed 
March 12th, 2007 4:15pm
> Many Libertarians feel that government is the root cause of poverty

Government is the root cause of much of global warming. You are just giving more power to them.

> Bad, but not something government ought to be involved in.

Exactly. If you can't find a job or get pay that's not business of the government. And if you cough a little or your land goes under water, that's not the governments business either.

> Health Care: I have no opinion yet.

Government is just as much at the root of healthism. People dying is bad, but it's not something the government ought to be in.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 12th, 2007 4:41pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: March, 2007 Other topics: March, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics