I find the SSC "Too much dark money in almonds" post interesting because it starts from the premise that there obviously isn't too much dark money in almonds, an argument from incredulity, and uses this (and similar) to argue that there isn't too much dark money in politics, but
I don't think that estimate is implausible. They estimate that people reduce consumer spending by a bit less than $1k per person per year due to housing costs and then estimate other effects that are double that, that could be right.
-
-
I think it's really difficult to do a direct comparison to water policy since most of the impact is expected to be in the future, I don't think it's implausible that current policies extrapolated into the future would have impact within an order of magnitude.
-
But I think this isn't quite the right comparison -- housing costs, while problematic, have relatively diffuse impact, a water district self destructing has much higher local impact. You can assign a dollar value to that, but it's always going to be handwave-y.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
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.