4 ms·
"his kind" just gave us what we asked (and paid good money) for
by nickpp 7y ago
"his kind" just gave us what we asked (and paid good money) for
- janpot 7y agowe never pay for the environmental cost. when we buy stuff, we basically always pay only part of the cost, the immediately visible cost, the intrinsic value of a product. the other costs they basically steal from us in the form of a destroyed future. the fallacy of consumerism.
- WizardAustralis 7y agoAll I can say is both of you are right.
- mantas 7y ago"They" steal from "us" or "us" get a discount?
- chillwaves 7y agoHow is it a discount when "we" still have to pay, just future generations?
- mantas 7y ago"We" get a discount today and "we" will pay back tomorrow. It's definitely not "they" making a profit on that discount. If they acted more responsibly it's "we" who'd cover extracts. At the end of the day, "their" profit would be the same.
- Retric 7y agoIf you tax to cover externalities then consumption goes down and producers make lower profits. The magnitude of these differences are debatable, but their direction is not.
- mantas 7y agoBut the tax doesn't disappear into thin air. People will be hired to fix externalities (e.g. plant trees) or get incentives to buy other stuff that has less externalities. It's not like those money will vanish from the economy.
- jacquesm 7y agoThere is some interest involved in that payment, and not all of it can be paid back because the cost was not monetary.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- janpot 7y agoIf we have to pay it eventually, then it's not "a discount".
- jacquesm 7y agoIt's stolen from your kids. And mine.
- taurath 7y agoI don’t think anyone in the modern era asked for the energy system we have.
- mantas 7y agoIDK, it's pretty cool to have electricity, heating and whatnot
- joshuaissac 7y agoI think the argument was against the significant environmental problems and the lobbying (e.g. against climate laws) coming from the big players in the energy industry, rather than against electricity and central heating. We can still have the latter without the former.
- mantas 7y agoBut the dirty episode was required to reach this stage when we can move onto next thing. And some time later today's "clean" likely will be seen as dangerous in some way. Just like today's "dirty" didn't seem that dirty when it came out. E.g. cars helped to relieve cities from horse shit.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]