3 ms·

>>Second, in your example of coal being made obsolete by market forces: governments are already skewing these forces with massive subsidies for fossil fuels. We

by syshum 5y ago

>>Second, in your example of coal being made obsolete by market forces: governments are already skewing these forces with massive subsidies for fossil fuels. We need governments to stop doing that. 100% agree, my entire post is about government inaction... My ideal government does nothing ;) that that applies to both sides of this, they should neither subsidize nor fine technologies. It should be up purely to market forces. >>Third, bringing new technology to market requires huge investments and risks. We need governments to incentivize and support this development so that it can happen as quickly as possible This has never been true for any advancement, Governments are TERRIBLE at picking winner and losers from a technology standpoint (see Ethanol) , and often time they SLOW not accelerate advancement. It has been proven in many sectors, including energy production, that once the government gets out of the way real progress begins. >I don't believe we can simply technology our way out of this. All of human history proves you wrong, but this time is the one time we should ignore history right?

gefhfff 5y ago
In Germany the government went out of the way when it came to digital technology Look where we ended up
xg15 5y ago
> All of human history proves you wrong, but this time is the one time we should ignore history right? Except all the actual scientists are agreeing with GP. The "tech will save us" mantra seems to come mostly from business types and libertarian pundits, not from the people actually working on those technologies.
sofixa 5y ago
> This has never been true for any advancement, Governments are TERRIBLE at picking winner and losers from a technology standpoint (see Ethanol) , and often time they SLOW not accelerate advancement. It has been proven in many sectors, including energy production, that once the government gets out of the way real progress begins. You probably know this, but without government intervention we'd still have leaded petrol, and renewables wouldn't have been as developed without the massive subsidies.
- syshum 5y ago
  Do we really know this? For decades various government agencies shielded many companies from liability, and continued to make public statements that leaded gas was "safe". in the 70s' public pressure, and outcry became large enough that companies started phasing out leaded gas as customers were demanded alternatives, it is at this point that government, working with industry developed the phase out plan that the public was demanded. This is often how regulations go, technology advances (in this case alternative anti-knock additives), public pressure builds, and at a critical junction industry allows (yes allows) government to "pass" regulation outlining something they were already going to do anyway based on public pressure. Now often the question is well if they were going to do it anyway why would they have government pass regulation. That is easy to answer because there is always some fear that some company will buck the trend, large companies hate competition but they can not coordinate on their own as that would be anti-trust violations, Thus government provides a nice avenue to ensure no competition on some matters or topics This is why facebook is currently asking the government for regulation. This is why Amazon supports a national sales tax, and why Walmart now supports increasing the minimum wage...

by syshum 5y ago

gefhfff 5y ago

In Germany the government went out of the way when it came to digital technology Look where we ended up

xg15 5y ago

> All of human history proves you wrong, but this time is the one time we should ignore history right? Except all the actual scientists are agreeing with GP. The "tech will save us" mantra seems to come mostly from business types and libertarian pundits, not from the people actually working on those technologies.

sofixa 5y ago

> This has never been true for any advancement, Governments are TERRIBLE at picking winner and losers from a technology standpoint (see Ethanol) , and often time they SLOW not accelerate advancement. It has been proven in many sectors, including energy production, that once the government gets out of the way real progress begins. You probably know this, but without government intervention we'd still have leaded petrol, and renewables wouldn't have been as developed without the massive subsidies.

syshum 5y ago
Do we really know this? For decades various government agencies shielded many companies from liability, and continued to make public statements that leaded gas was "safe". in the 70s' public pressure, and outcry became large enough that companies started phasing out leaded gas as customers were demanded alternatives, it is at this point that government, working with industry developed the phase out plan that the public was demanded. This is often how regulations go, technology advances (in this case alternative anti-knock additives), public pressure builds, and at a critical junction industry allows (yes allows) government to "pass" regulation outlining something they were already going to do anyway based on public pressure. Now often the question is well if they were going to do it anyway why would they have government pass regulation. That is easy to answer because there is always some fear that some company will buck the trend, large companies hate competition but they can not coordinate on their own as that would be anti-trust violations, Thus government provides a nice avenue to ensure no competition on some matters or topics This is why facebook is currently asking the government for regulation. This is why Amazon supports a national sales tax, and why Walmart now supports increasing the minimum wage...