3 ms·

Here is how it works: 1. start with moderate regulations in the USA 2. switch to tough regulations in the USA 3. industry moves to a place with lax regulatio

by tropo 10y ago

Here is how it works: 1. start with moderate regulations in the USA 2. switch to tough regulations in the USA 3. industry moves to a place with lax regulations 4. pollution blows across the ocean 5. the USA gets smog It seems we went wrong at step 2, unless you'd like to stop international trade. By being extra strict, we actually got more pollution. We'd have better air and water if we partially gutted the EPA. We have failed at keeping our water and air clean, and we also lost our jobs.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Not really; even with the smog the US has now that this contributes to, it is far less than before regulation, and shifting comparative advantage away from dirty manufacturing hasn't reduced the average rate of aggregate growth in the US. The economic problems experienced everywhere but the top of the income distribution in the US are entirely distributional problems, not aggregate activity problems, and they stem from policies which have deliberately shifted retained gains up the distribution over the past 40 years or so (Reagan's tax shift being a major early contribution.) "Job losses" to outsourcing and immigration are convenient distractions because they are easy to conceptualize, but they don't really reflect the substance of the real problems.
nikdaheratik 10y ago
I don't think this is an accurate picture: 1. Job growth has increased overall by every measure since the EPA has started. Regulations mainly affect industrial manufacturing jobs, and job growth in most of those is more affected by automation than environmental regulation. 2. Overall air and water pollution is down substantially in the U.S. since we've put tougher regulations in place. What this article seems to be saying is that we're reaching the point where toughing EPA regulations further won't do as much to improve air quality since half of the remaining air pollution is coming from outside the country. 3. International trade regulations and consumer actions can still reduce some pollution outside of the U.S. simply by making more environmental friendly manufacturing a selling point for your products. It won't have as much effect for heavy industry, which is what produces most of the pollution, but it can and has made a difference in electronics and use of plastics in packaging.

by tropo 10y ago

dragonwriter 10y ago

Not really; even with the smog the US has now that this contributes to, it is far less than before regulation, and shifting comparative advantage away from dirty manufacturing hasn't reduced the average rate of aggregate growth in the US. The economic problems experienced everywhere but the top of the income distribution in the US are entirely distributional problems, not aggregate activity problems, and they stem from policies which have deliberately shifted retained gains up the distribution over the past 40 years or so (Reagan's tax shift being a major early contribution.) "Job losses" to outsourcing and immigration are convenient distractions because they are easy to conceptualize, but they don't really reflect the substance of the real problems.

nikdaheratik 10y ago

I don't think this is an accurate picture: 1. Job growth has increased overall by every measure since the EPA has started. Regulations mainly affect industrial manufacturing jobs, and job growth in most of those is more affected by automation than environmental regulation. 2. Overall air and water pollution is down substantially in the U.S. since we've put tougher regulations in place. What this article seems to be saying is that we're reaching the point where toughing EPA regulations further won't do as much to improve air quality since half of the remaining air pollution is coming from outside the country. 3. International trade regulations and consumer actions can still reduce some pollution outside of the U.S. simply by making more environmental friendly manufacturing a selling point for your products. It won't have as much effect for heavy industry, which is what produces most of the pollution, but it can and has made a difference in electronics and use of plastics in packaging.