Comments on: Baptists, Bootleggers, and Global Warming http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Jose Ramones http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15478 Jose Ramones Fri, 13 Feb 2009 03:03:34 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15478 great blog! great blog!

]]> By: Patricia W Olson http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15477 Patricia W Olson Thu, 12 Feb 2009 01:27:35 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15477 tu blog es excelente! te mando 611 felicitaciones! tu blog es excelente! te mando 611 felicitaciones!

]]> By: Jillian J Monahan http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15476 Jillian J Monahan Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:38:20 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15476 your blog is really great! 307 your blog is really great! 307

]]> By: Betty R Brent http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15475 Betty R Brent Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:11:14 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15475 great article!, grats for u site :) great article!, grats for u site :)

]]> By: Bulimia http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15474 Bulimia Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:40:25 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15474 Thanks for the info. May God have mercy on us all. Thanks for the info. May God have mercy on us all.

]]> By: Pithlord http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15473 Pithlord Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:27:42 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15473 This reminds me of some arguments I have had with economic determinists over the Iraq war. Yes, for any public policy, the genius of capitalism means someone is going to try to profit from it and, yes, those people will fund a push for the public policy. It does not follow that the original impetus for the policy is profit-seeking. And since this is just a universal fact about all policies whatsoever, it doesn't tell you much about whether the policy is wise or stupid, just or unjust. Somebody is going to make money from lowered trade barriers, and that somebody will pay something for lobbyists. Someone would make money out of the end of the drug war, or school vouchers, or whatever. If they became serious subjects of possible political action, there would be rent-seeking. So what? This reminds me of some arguments I have had with economic determinists over the Iraq war. Yes, for any public policy, the genius of capitalism means someone is going to try to profit from it and, yes, those people will fund a push for the public policy. It does not follow that the original impetus for the policy is profit-seeking. And since this is just a universal fact about all policies whatsoever, it doesn’t tell you much about whether the policy is wise or stupid, just or unjust.

Somebody is going to make money from lowered trade barriers, and that somebody will pay something for lobbyists. Someone would make money out of the end of the drug war, or school vouchers, or whatever. If they became serious subjects of possible political action, there would be rent-seeking. So what?

]]> By: Pithlord http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15481 Pithlord Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:27:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15481 This reminds me of some arguments I have had with economic determinists over the Iraq war. Yes, for any public policy, the genius of capitalism means someone is going to try to profit from it and, yes, those people will fund a push for the public policy. It does not follow that the original impetus for the policy is profit-seeking. And since this is just a universal fact about all policies whatsoever, it doesn't tell you much about whether the policy is wise or stupid, just or unjust. Somebody is going to make money from lowered trade barriers, and that somebody will pay something for lobbyists. Someone would make money out of the end of the drug war, or school vouchers, or whatever. If they became serious subjects of possible political action, there would be rent-seeking. So what? This reminds me of some arguments I have had with economic determinists over the Iraq war. Yes, for any public policy, the genius of capitalism means someone is going to try to profit from it and, yes, those people will fund a push for the public policy. It does not follow that the original impetus for the policy is profit-seeking. And since this is just a universal fact about all policies whatsoever, it doesn’t tell you much about whether the policy is wise or stupid, just or unjust.

Somebody is going to make money from lowered trade barriers, and that somebody will pay something for lobbyists. Someone would make money out of the end of the drug war, or school vouchers, or whatever. If they became serious subjects of possible political action, there would be rent-seeking. So what?

]]> By: John http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15472 John Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:15:38 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15472 <blockquote>Oh, and why have all these big players lined up behind cap and trade and not a tax? Wouldn't the equivalence thesis predict indifference? I suspect that the answer is that their expected competitive advantage given a tax is lower than their expected advantage given cap and trade. In which case, that's a pretty significant real-world failure of equivalence, no?</blockquote> That's exactly why they're doing it. And the specifics of the kinds of cap-and-trade policies that they're advocating for - auctioned credits vs. free ones, and so on - are entirely in alignment with their economic interests, too. Obviously corporate interests should get to speak their piece about how they want things to go, but you'd think that the results of their lobbying would be met with a bit more skepticism.

Oh, and why have all these big players lined up behind cap and trade and not a tax? Wouldn’t the equivalence thesis predict indifference? I suspect that the answer is that their expected competitive advantage given a tax is lower than their expected advantage given cap and trade. In which case, that’s a pretty significant real-world failure of equivalence, no?

That’s exactly why they’re doing it. And the specifics of the kinds of cap-and-trade policies that they’re advocating for – auctioned credits vs. free ones, and so on – are entirely in alignment with their economic interests, too. Obviously corporate interests should get to speak their piece about how they want things to go, but you’d think that the results of their lobbying would be met with a bit more skepticism.

]]> By: John http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15480 John Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:15:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15480 <blockquote>Oh, and why have all these big players lined up behind cap and trade and not a tax? Wouldn't the equivalence thesis predict indifference? I suspect that the answer is that their expected competitive advantage given a tax is lower than their expected advantage given cap and trade. In which case, that's a pretty significant real-world failure of equivalence, no?</blockquote> That's exactly why they're doing it. And the specifics of the kinds of cap-and-trade policies that they're advocating for - auctioned credits vs. free ones, and so on - are entirely in alignment with their economic interests, too. Obviously corporate interests should get to speak their piece about how they want things to go, but you'd think that the results of their lobbying would be met with a bit more skepticism.

Oh, and why have all these big players lined up behind cap and trade and not a tax? Wouldn’t the equivalence thesis predict indifference? I suspect that the answer is that their expected competitive advantage given a tax is lower than their expected advantage given cap and trade. In which case, that’s a pretty significant real-world failure of equivalence, no?

That’s exactly why they’re doing it. And the specifics of the kinds of cap-and-trade policies that they’re advocating for – auctioned credits vs. free ones, and so on – are entirely in alignment with their economic interests, too. Obviously corporate interests should get to speak their piece about how they want things to go, but you’d think that the results of their lobbying would be met with a bit more skepticism.

]]> By: Todays Current Events in the Environment » Alert - “global warming” http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/04/baptists-bootleggers-and-global-warming/#comment-15471 Todays Current Events in the Environment » Alert - “global warming” Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:00:25 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1484#comment-15471 [...] Baptists, Bootleggers, and Global Warming By Will Wilkinson Maybe Robertson is a global warming true believer and just wants to help capitalize the firms that are going to save the world and maybe he just wants to get even richer. I?m not so uncertain about GE and Goldman. … Will Wilkinson / The Fly Bottle - http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle [...] [...] Baptists, Bootleggers, and Global Warming By Will Wilkinson Maybe Robertson is a global warming true believer and just wants to help capitalize the firms that are going to save the world and maybe he just wants to get even richer. I?m not so uncertain about GE and Goldman. … Will Wilkinson / The Fly Bottle – http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle [...]

]]>