Comments on: Are the politics of climate change easier or harder than the politics of economic reform?

By: M J Warby

M J Warby — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:21:35 +0000

The analogy with economic reform is not a good one. Economic reform created or released–and continues to do so–large amounts of economic value. Things just work better and, after a while, that became obvious. Hence the long boom, low inflation, low unemployment, budget surplus, etc.

Emission control is, at best, a form of prevention. It is a way of raising costs of a basic element in the economy so we use (and therefore emit) it much less. It shrinks the available resources–that is the point of it.

Technological change may, eventually, compensate. But emission control remains a process which produces net economic losses and is intended to do so. That makes its politics very different from selling economic reforms with great great net economic gains.

By: Josh McDonough

Josh McDonough — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:25:35 +0000

What about just a straight out tax on carbon-intensive products, with equal drops in say, income tax (not that that would happen)? I don’t understand why it was decided years ago, no argument, that a cap-and-trade system would be the best system for Australia to ‘tackle’ global warming. It can’t just be because it has the word “tax” in it, or that a cap-and-trade system provides leftists with another body that tries to control the economy. Or maybe it is just that.

Conrad, it’s doubtful that nuclear power will be “fairly” evaluated, or mainly, that there will be any serious attempt on the part of the major parties to try and change the opinion of the majority of Australians.

By: conrad

conrad — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 21:55:15 +0000

“Maybe nuclear power had something to do with it”
That’s good — I have nothing against nuclear power (I think it has many advantages, not least of which you don’t have to buy it from countries you rather wouldn’t want to). I think it should fairly evaluated along with everything else.

By: Temujin (John Humphreys)

Temujin (John Humphreys) — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:50:56 +0000

Consumers have benefited from economic liberalisation, but many of them don’t know it.

By: Rafe Champion

Rafe Champion — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:58:14 +0000

Conrad, it is most likely that Germany has cut back on emmissions as a result of using less coal, a process that has been in train since the 1950s. How do you think they managed that? Maybe nuclear power had something to do with it, and if we had 50 years of lead time to get up some nucler power plants we could phase out coal in a relatively painless manner as well.

Beware of the biofuel movement, that has raised world food prices by a wide margin. http://www.knowledgeproblem.com/archives/002575.html

That is catastrophic for the Third World and it is presumably killing people already. Just one of the downsides of climate panic. The costs of clmate panic may be paid in places that are invisihle to us.

By: Spiros

Spiros — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 06:54:44 +0000

Yes JC, but some things are more carbon intensive than others. While it’s true that the local hairdresser’s electricity bills will go up, it won’t be a big deal.

This is the GST all over again. We managed then. We can manage now.

By: JC

JC — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 06:45:12 +0000

Rafe, from people who buy stuff with carbon in it, such as petrol.

Spiros everything we buy these days- even services has an element of embedded carbon.

By: conrad

conrad — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 06:36:38 +0000

Rafe: Here is the list for all countries (including Germany):

I can’t find California vs. the rest of US at present.

Where are your massive costs incidentally?

By: Spiros

Spiros — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 05:37:51 +0000

Rafe, from people who buy stuff with carbon in it, such as petrol. Here’s how it works. Let’s say you buy 3000 litres of petrol a year. The price of petrol will probably be 10c a litre higher. So indirectly you’re paying $300 per year for the emissions permits. But you get a cut in your income taxes of $300, so it’s swings and roundabouts, just like with the GST. Of course with petrol, the government will probably cut the excise by 10c, so it’s swings and swings.

By: Rafe

Rafe — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 05:04:21 +0000

Spiros, where do the billions come from to buy the permits?

Conrad, how much have the Germans and Californians reduced their emmissions?