3 ms·

It’s hilarious that you’re so centred in your own politics that you don’t see the hypocrisy in that statement btw. “Tariffs are easier to enable”. Sure, FOR YO

by sprafa 7y ago

It’s hilarious that you’re so centred in your own politics that you don’t see the hypocrisy in that statement btw. “Tariffs are easier to enable”. Sure, FOR YOU. By you are fucking over Brasil twice - once by enacting climate by your irresponsible, untaxed and unregulated carbon emissions. Then by BLAMING Brasil for doing something productive with THEIR forest land. Why don’t you just tax your own carbon emissions and make a difference instead? Oh it’s politically difficult. Same as any action against carbon emissions. So let’s fuck over the third world twice by A) causing climate change which will affect them more than us and B) making THEM PAY for OUR IRRESPONSIBILITY. Why ? Because it’s more politically feasible to fuck them than to limit our own industrial capacity. America First

AnthonyMouse 7y ago
Distributing blame and accusing people of hypocrisy doesn't change anybody's behavior. Countries screw over other countries for their own benefit all the time and they're not going to stop as a result of moralizing rhetoric. And it doesn't even necessarily change anything. Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem The difference between tariffs and subsidies is who gets the money. But even that doesn't really change very much unless the different people have significantly different preferences. If the American fat cats are just going to invest the money into the same ventures as the Brazilian fat cats then there is no real difference at all.
- sprafa 7y ago
  American fat cats should buy up the amazon for the purpose of protecting it. I’m obviously not defending the idea that they exploit it same as the Brazilians.
  - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
    That's not what I'm talking about. Suppose we give them money for the rain forest so they leave it alone, and they take the money and invest it in the S&P 500, and then take the returns from that and reinvest it in the same thing. Suppose instead we threaten them with trade sanctions if they don't leave the rain forest alone, keep our money and invest it in the S&P 500 ourselves. It's the same result in practice. The real cost to Brazil is that they don't get to have an agriculture industry where there used to be rain forest. Which fat cat subsequently gets to be the nominal owner of some shares of SPX has no real effect on ordinary humans. The fat cats care but nothing real changes for anybody else.
    - sprafa 7y ago
      You couldn’t really expect me to understand all that from what you said. Thanks for explaining in the end but I wonder if your specialised knowledge and thought into this made it harder for you to explain the concept in plain language. Maybe it’s obvious to you, but it wasn’t for me.

by sprafa 7y ago

AnthonyMouse 7y ago

Distributing blame and accusing people of hypocrisy doesn't change anybody's behavior. Countries screw over other countries for their own benefit all the time and they're not going to stop as a result of moralizing rhetoric. And it doesn't even necessarily change anything. Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem The difference between tariffs and subsidies is who gets the money. But even that doesn't really change very much unless the different people have significantly different preferences. If the American fat cats are just going to invest the money into the same ventures as the Brazilian fat cats then there is no real difference at all.

sprafa 7y ago
American fat cats should buy up the amazon for the purpose of protecting it. I’m obviously not defending the idea that they exploit it same as the Brazilians.
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago
  That's not what I'm talking about. Suppose we give them money for the rain forest so they leave it alone, and they take the money and invest it in the S&P 500, and then take the returns from that and reinvest it in the same thing. Suppose instead we threaten them with trade sanctions if they don't leave the rain forest alone, keep our money and invest it in the S&P 500 ourselves. It's the same result in practice. The real cost to Brazil is that they don't get to have an agriculture industry where there used to be rain forest. Which fat cat subsequently gets to be the nominal owner of some shares of SPX has no real effect on ordinary humans. The fat cats care but nothing real changes for anybody else.
  - sprafa 7y ago
    You couldn’t really expect me to understand all that from what you said. Thanks for explaining in the end but I wonder if your specialised knowledge and thought into this made it harder for you to explain the concept in plain language. Maybe it’s obvious to you, but it wasn’t for me.