Why the free market helps the environment - page 2.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Bjork on October 21, 2012, 06:14:53 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:54:24 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:42:57 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:39:10 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

well, I did say "can" Grin

. Corruption and abuse of power in government is a whole different problem/debate.

Giving government control over the environment Is effectively giving them the ability to issue licenses to pollute. Since this cannot happen in a private market, I fail to see how government "can" protect the market better than the free market, given that all they can do is not issue those licenses, at best matching the free market.

they can also levee taxes, reducing/discouraging businesses that are polluting.

In a free market economy, with all land privately owned, polluters who damage other people's persons or property have to pay them restitution. If they only damage their own land, then they reduce it's future value (unless cleaned up). Either way, they're losing money, and without the option of lobbying for tax breaks. This likewise discourages polluting businesses.

FirstAscent

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Quote from: dree12 on October 20, 2012, 11:40:36 PM

Quote from: FirstAscent on October 16, 2012, 11:53:53 PM

The free market is environment indifferent. The free market helps benefit those who exploit what it has to offer. Nothing more, and nothing less.

The actions of the government can protect or destroy the environment. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Properly and intelligently applied rules based on research can slow down the destruction of the environment in a world that seems to value economic growth over the protection of natural capital.

Do yourself and society a favor: never use your political agendas which are not 100 percent based on scientific evidence and knowledge about the environment and for protecting the environment as a vehicle to promote your political agendas as if they were designed to protect the environment. The two do not mix. Either you understand environmental issues and ecology and have an agenda to protect it, or you don't.

If your agenda is to promote a free market, then promote a free market with knowledge that you possess, and not with incomplete knowledge about other subjects.

Please read:

Free-market environmentalism.

They're doing exactly what I said not to do in paragraph four of my original post. In other words, your reply is definitely not a convincing argument.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3052

Merit: 1031

RIP Mommy

Quote from: Bjork on October 21, 2012, 06:14:53 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:54:24 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:42:57 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:39:10 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

well, I did say "can" Grin

. Corruption and abuse of power in government is a whole different problem/debate.

Giving government control over the environment Is effectively giving them the ability to issue licenses to pollute. Since this cannot happen in a private market, I fail to see how government "can" protect the market better than the free market, given that all they can do is not issue those licenses, at best matching the free market.

they can also levee taxes, reducing/discouraging businesses that are polluting.

Or people who, in the Newspeak dictionary, exhale "pollutants" like CO2. One would prefer the Party lead by example and permanently cease exhaling first.

Bjork

sr. member

Activity: 457

Merit: 250

Look for the bear necessities!!

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:54:24 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:42:57 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:39:10 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

well, I did say "can" Grin

. Corruption and abuse of power in government is a whole different problem/debate.

Giving government control over the environment Is effectively giving them the ability to issue licenses to pollute. Since this cannot happen in a private market, I fail to see how government "can" protect the market better than the free market, given that all they can do is not issue those licenses, at best matching the free market.

they can also levee taxes, reducing/discouraging businesses that are polluting.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1076

Quote from: FirstAscent on October 16, 2012, 11:53:53 PM

The free market is environment indifferent. The free market helps benefit those who exploit what it has to offer. Nothing more, and nothing less.

The actions of the government can protect or destroy the environment. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Properly and intelligently applied rules based on research can slow down the destruction of the environment in a world that seems to value economic growth over the protection of natural capital.

Do yourself and society a favor: never use your political agendas which are not 100 percent based on scientific evidence and knowledge about the environment and for protecting the environment as a vehicle to promote your political agendas as if they were designed to protect the environment. The two do not mix. Either you understand environmental issues and ecology and have an agenda to protect it, or you don't.

If your agenda is to promote a free market, then promote a free market with knowledge that you possess, and not with incomplete knowledge about other subjects.

Please read:

Free-market environmentalism.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:42:57 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:39:10 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

well, I did say "can" Grin

. Corruption and abuse of power in government is a whole different problem/debate.

Giving government control over the environment Is effectively giving them the ability to issue licenses to pollute. Since this cannot happen in a private market, I fail to see how government "can" protect the market better than the free market, given that all they can do is not issue those licenses, at best matching the free market.

Bjork

sr. member

Activity: 457

Merit: 250

Look for the bear necessities!!

Quote from: myrkul on October 20, 2012, 08:39:10 PM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

well, I did say "can" Grin

. Corruption and abuse of power in government is a whole different problem/debate.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Bjork on October 20, 2012, 08:30:46 PM

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

Funny how governments tend to be the biggest polluters then, huh?

Bjork

sr. member

Activity: 457

Merit: 250

Look for the bear necessities!!

Government can protect the environment much better than the free market. If you've ever taken an economics class you'd know about externalities and how sometimes the free market will not find the "correct" price--thus justifying government intervention.

FirstAscent

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

The free market is environment indifferent. The free market helps benefit those who exploit what it has to offer. Nothing more, and nothing less.

The actions of the government can protect or destroy the environment. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Properly and intelligently applied rules based on research can slow down the destruction of the environment in a world that seems to value economic growth over the protection of natural capital.

Do yourself and society a favor: never use your political agendas which are not 100 percent based on scientific evidence and knowledge about the environment and for protecting the environment as a vehicle to promote your political agendas as if they were designed to protect the environment. The two do not mix. Either you understand environmental issues and ecology and have an agenda to protect it, or you don't.

If your agenda is to promote a free market, then promote a free market with knowledge that you possess, and not with incomplete knowledge about other subjects.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1003

Chinese solar panels sold below manufacturing cost...

According to the government it is a technique to put US panel makers out of business. But the free market is a complex beast. Due to these cheap panels a number of companies have flourished installing panels on American roofs. This has created jobs and lessened the dependence on fossil fuels.

So the government views these panels as an economic attack, I view them as a GIFT. If they want to sell them below cost, let them. Solar panel makers will still exist in the US and some of them may even come up with better lower cost manufacturing due to the pressure. In addition the American panel makers have less transportation costs and may have more long term trust as well.

dree12

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1076

This is what happens when protectionism and government intervention occur: a tax on solar panels.

We already well know the the US puts twice as much money into oil than sustainable energy, spends millions on increasing oil production in the US colony in Mesopotamia (Iraq), and continues to mass-produce weapons for the military, polluting the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico. It was no surprise that the government just doesn't care that our planet will become a forsaken garbage-filled steaming wasteland. But this is just ridiculous: taxing solar panels?

The rationale given was that China doesn't have a free market. Well, guess what? Neither does the States. They can't get a free market until they stop this oil-run government from intervening in the market.

Topic: Why the free market helps the environment - page 2. (Read 1969 times)