Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Well I took Econ 101 so I understand that artificially limiting supply raises prices. If that means I'm part of the "free market crowd" then I guess I am outside the group of people whom you will listen to. Pity.
|
Bottom line: solutions to global warming require innovation, promote people who do not fear change, and result in increased economic prosperity, wealth, and health.
We know from history: those who did most to solve previous environmental problems prospered most from the resulting innovations and productivity increases. 1960s pollution standards meant engines burned less gasoline to do same. Needed less parts. More reliable. Lasted longer. Cost less. Where did solutions to pollution destroy the economy - as naysayers claimed? Where naysayers stifled innovation (ie GM) and denied the problem’s existence, then naysayers also harmed the American economy.
Econ 101 says solutions to global warming also make us economically wealthier and healthier. To ignore the problem and its solutions means importing more foreign oil - squander American wealth - be less productive – be more wasteful - stifle innovate. Why would White House lawyers rewrite science papers? People who wanted this to happen to America said we would all be driving Pintos today if EPA standards were enforced. Why were they wrong? George Jr, his White House lawyers, and other naysayers advocated the same political agenda based in fear. In their uneducated world, Econ 101 says we must not innovate - we must ignore all problems – because that is good.
Let's see those numbers again. A car consumes ten gallons of gas while using something above one gallon productively. Well over eight of every ten gallons is wasted - does nothing productive. UT and Henry say this is good and acceptable. Solutions to global warming imply three out of ten gallons would be used productively. Lessons from Econ 101 (and history) say we can all use less energy to do more. Its called innovation. Who would fear this? Naysayers who deny global warming using political agendas.
Fear of change and denial facts was routine among the naysayers. Same troglodytes attempted to subvert 1970 emission standard and denied ozone depletion. Econ 101 says solutions to global warming only make our economy healthier and more productive. Naysayers say it is good when over eight of every ten gallons of gasoline are wasted. Naysayers love the waste, destruction and stifled innovation. Naysayers fear change. Ignore numbers. The numbers are obvious.
Global warming does exist. Exceeds anything the earth has ever seen. Only remaining question is how severe that problem is.