I think I've put together the perfect 1-2-3 combo of readings for teaching about climate economics (by which I mostly mean the logic of deciding how much to invest). These three readings convey the important concepts and give a lot to talk (and argue) about.
We should pay fair compensation for the damage our externalities will cause. In this context, the concepts of "investment" and "income transfer or redistribution" are completely irrelevant. We should compensate future generations because it is they who will be damaged.
-
-
Yeah, I agree (and I think that is one hole of Schelling's argument - that he never brings up anything like guilt/reparations). But it, of course, doesn't change his point very much: if we are paying reparations, what is the right amount and what is the right form?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.