4 ms·
The market does not price in externalities. That's why they call them that. Nuclear has significantly cheaper externalities than fossil fuels. You should prefer
by ouid 5y ago
The market does not price in externalities. That's why they call them that. Nuclear has significantly cheaper externalities than fossil fuels. You should prefer it, and subsidize it in kind.
- SllX 5y agoSubsidizing nuclear is entirely theoretical for me, unless I’m subsidizing it in other States which I wouldn’t be happy to do if it won’t benefit me directly (not indirectly: directly). California presently has a flat prohibition on new nuclear construction. I would rather keep my dollars for my own utility bill, unless Nevada would like to play host to a nuclear plant built to serve the Bay Area.
- aiisjustanif 5y agoI guess the states aren’t so united. Federal Texas are for federal uses which can include state ones.
- SllX 5y agoYou’re not wrong but that’s exactly my problem: this isn’t something for the Feds to subsidize. They need to get out of the business of subsidizing industry.
- ouid 5y agoAnything that is capable of negotiating on behalf of society in the case of a transaction that produces externalities is going to be indistinguishable from a government. If you're arguing that no one should advocate for society's interests in these transactions, then you should make that position explicit.