Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Should we reduce our energy consumption? Well, that would come at the cost of reduced economic output. Should we switch from carbon energy to solar/wind/geo/nuclear? Well, that would require enormous investment. Where to get such funds?
(preface, I'm not an economist) The problem I see with accounting for externalities using taxes and subsidies that they basically tech you in econ 101 that those things are bad. They moosh the economy around in places it doesn't want to be & result in a misallocation of...
Resources away from the natural equilibrium. But - couldn't we say that the natural equilibrium is actually wrong? It assumes it accounts for the total cost of the good & assumes perfect information between consumers & corps. This aint the case
Finally: how does one put a price on the destruction of the environment? Who gets to say how valuable a prefer of fertile land is?
Taxes and subsidies have long been tools in the arsenal of the political elite. I'm not a fan — they are bad for the free market. However, if the free market is overextended, which it seems to be, what other tools are available?
The issue I see is that we like what is useful and inexpensive. Over time, we decide we prefer certain values over the cheap/useful. Health, well-being, fruitfulness, value, fun, memories... IDK its a messy list! But we pay more for that nowadays.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
