Sorry, I read CO2 into your definition of pollution and negative
externalities and you never actually said that.
Chuck Norcutt
Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> Exactly! While I am concerned about the environment in general, all I
> was stating here is the "polluter pays" principle. Standard
> microeconomics tells you that the best way to combat negative
> externalities is to make sure that those who cause them bear the full
> cost. If it is fair that BP pays for the cleanup of the Gulf, then it
> is equally fair that truckers and owners of SUVs pay for the damage
> they cause.
>
> BTW, I warmly support nuclear power, so I am certainly no wild-eyed
> green ;-)
>
> Cheers, nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com PICTURE OF THE WEEK:
> http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Mike Lazzari wrote:
>
>>> My prayer: Oh Lord, please save us from Euro
>>> environmentalists.:-)
>>>
>> Not environmentalist,...economist :-) There was nothing
>> enviromental at all in Nathan's post. It is the economics of
>> subsidy.
>>
>> Socialism is alive and well in the US. But it's the corporations at
>> the receiving end. --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|