Why are so many economists so dismissive of attempts to do something about climate change? Adam Finkel, a regulatory law expert at the University of Pennsylvania, has a wonderful take on that question, in a comment posted at The Intersection, in response to a recent Newsweek column by Robert Samuelson. The money quote, so to speak:
[George F. Will], asked a legitimate half-question: "Are we sure the climate at this particular moment is exactly right, and that it must be preserved, no matter the cost?" If economists would ask, and help us answer, the more interesting half of the question--"Are we so sure the economy at this particular moment is exactly right, and that it must be preserved, no matter the cost?"--we might actually understand something about what we might lose, and gain, by taking the steps Samuelson says, with no foundation, are "too difficult."
Not for nothing do they call economics the dismal science. It was refreshed to read such wisdom the same morning I heard Bjorn Lomborg on NPR's Morning Edition extolling the virutes of "discounting" actions, and other such nonsense.
If you have nothing better to do, read Samuelson's straw-man rebuttal to the recent Newsweek feature on the climate change denial campaign first, then read Finkel's response.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
There were a lot of comments to Friday's post, in which I shared U. Penn risk assessment specialist Adam Finkel's critique of a particularly bad Robert Samuelson column in Newsweek. Now, Finkel has come back and responded in detail to all of your comments. Check it out. A very brief excerpt:…
Several weeks ago, Newsweek ran a much-discussed cover story by Sharon Begley "revealing" the story that many of us have been writing for years: There has been a campaign, supported by many fossil fuel interests, to sow doubt about mainstream climate science. Duh. The main newsworthy thing about…
Aside from the climate blogosphere, Paul Krugman's "Conscience of a Liberal" is my most regular blog visit. He does not usually have a lot to say on climate change (which is mildly disappointing) and I have seen only very shallow and casual dismissals of the, to me compelling, notion that…
PZ Myers suggested I might have something to say in response to Bjorn "The Skeptical Environmentalist" Lomborg's resurfacing. Indeed I do. The Danish boy wonder is back with a new book, Cool It, in which he makes his case, yet again, that climate change isn't all that bad. He was wrong with his…
I'm starting to think they should call economics the dumbass science. New Orleans had a noticeable effect on the US economy. George Will should imagine the same thing in Miami, New York, Tokyo, London ... lots and lots of other cities and he'd have a pretty good reason why this climate is good and a warmer one is bad.
Then imagine the Midwest as a giant dust-bowl, (more) invasive species in Northern latitudes, and the rainforests on fire... where would we get cheap hardwoods for furniture at WorldMarket?
Or maybe Will has a failure of imagination?