4 ms·

Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps The reason you don't litter,

Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. Sure there might be some laws you begrudgingly put up with because of the risk vs reward but making a lot of people do that at scale that doesn't work well. Convincing people to voluntarily do what you want is far cheaper than violence or threat of violence and it comes with a much lower risk of you being shot in the hole you just dug.

falcolas 5y ago
> you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor Funny, the first three are covered by laws and regulations - local and international. I'm less certain about the conflict diamonds, but I believe there are regulations around those too. > Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps That's because there are enough people who value money and power that they will never do the right thing unless forced. The tragedy of the commons, as it is. The Meditations on Moloch paper covers quite a bit of this.
ehnto 5y ago
I'm talking about regulating corporations, taxes, tariffs, trade restrictions, material bans and so on, maybe that wasn't clear in my argument or maybe I don't quite understand yours? But even on an individual level, money is still a huge guiding factor for society in general, so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. > The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. People do all these things, knowingly ignoring all the externalities of their actions. The world is full of decent human beings, and yet the above is still true. Just look at the roads, we're all thoroughly aware that cars pollute our cities even in the immediate tense, let alone long term, yet the roads are still full. Let's not blame the individual for industrial pollution anyway, since the majority of emissions are still from industrial activity. People have marginal agency on changing that. What's a consumer going to do about bunker fuel in shipping ships? How am I going to influence the processes used in steel mills?
- dempseye 5y ago
  Regulations on corporations are ultimately backed up by threats of violence too.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    Not practically they're not. They would suffer fines, at worst you'd have the people running the company get fined, at an absolute extreme they'd go to jail (VW/dieselgate). You could argue that prison time is the point that it backed by violence, but I must admit I'm fairly surprised that we're discussing the validity of laws and regulation as a concept in general, in response to regulating industrial pollution.
    - cableshaft 5y ago
      I used to listen to Libertarian talk shows back in the day. Those people thought all laws, regulation, and taxation were violence (they only work because government will point a gun at you and throw you in prison). They're not exactly wrong, but I no longer find the argument very persuasive. In the same sense, corporations are committing violence on us also, by destroying the planet that we all live on.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. The issue is that there's no guarantee that the 10% extra burden is going to green initiatives. It ends up going to the ever ballooning government budget and pays for pension funds for underperforming government employees.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    That is true, but it would still serve its main purpose of being a deterrent for high carbon activities/products I think.

falcolas 5y ago

> you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor Funny, the first three are covered by laws and regulations - local and international. I'm less certain about the conflict diamonds, but I believe there are regulations around those too. > Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps That's because there are enough people who value money and power that they will never do the right thing unless forced. The tragedy of the commons, as it is. The Meditations on Moloch paper covers quite a bit of this.

ehnto 5y ago

I'm talking about regulating corporations, taxes, tariffs, trade restrictions, material bans and so on, maybe that wasn't clear in my argument or maybe I don't quite understand yours? But even on an individual level, money is still a huge guiding factor for society in general, so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. > The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. People do all these things, knowingly ignoring all the externalities of their actions. The world is full of decent human beings, and yet the above is still true. Just look at the roads, we're all thoroughly aware that cars pollute our cities even in the immediate tense, let alone long term, yet the roads are still full. Let's not blame the individual for industrial pollution anyway, since the majority of emissions are still from industrial activity. People have marginal agency on changing that. What's a consumer going to do about bunker fuel in shipping ships? How am I going to influence the processes used in steel mills?

dempseye 5y ago
Regulations on corporations are ultimately backed up by threats of violence too.
- ehnto 5y ago
  Not practically they're not. They would suffer fines, at worst you'd have the people running the company get fined, at an absolute extreme they'd go to jail (VW/dieselgate). You could argue that prison time is the point that it backed by violence, but I must admit I'm fairly surprised that we're discussing the validity of laws and regulation as a concept in general, in response to regulating industrial pollution.
  - cableshaft 5y ago
    I used to listen to Libertarian talk shows back in the day. Those people thought all laws, regulation, and taxation were violence (they only work because government will point a gun at you and throw you in prison). They're not exactly wrong, but I no longer find the argument very persuasive. In the same sense, corporations are committing violence on us also, by destroying the planet that we all live on.
908B64B197 5y ago
> so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. The issue is that there's no guarantee that the 10% extra burden is going to green initiatives. It ends up going to the ever ballooning government budget and pays for pension funds for underperforming government employees.
- ehnto 5y ago
  That is true, but it would still serve its main purpose of being a deterrent for high carbon activities/products I think.