7 ms·

No, that's not what pricing in externalities is. It'd be taxing at whatever level is necessary to pay for the damages caused, not at the level that forces peopl

No, that's not what pricing in externalities is. It'd be taxing at whatever level is necessary to pay for the damages caused, not at the level that forces people not to do the damage.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
Nature does not offer the option of “paying for the damages caused”. We cannot fix it or replace it like a fungible good. You either prevent the damage from occurring, or you deal with the consequences. E.g. the damage to communities from being in isolated residences in unwalkable communities where kids cannot freely play outside has no dollar amount.
- thfuran 3y ago
  >We cannot fix it or replace it like a fungible good. That rather depends on exactly what we're talking about. CO2 can be stripped from the atmosphere, for example. It's just somewhat expensive. >E.g. the damage to communities from being in isolated residences in unwalkable communities where kids cannot freely play outside has no dollar amount. Sure it does. Even deaths have reasonably well established values, legally speaking. And things like expected future medical costs or lost productivity are much more straightforward to assign a value.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Our opinions will have to differ then. There is no number I would accept for the loss kids experience by not having a “right to roam” due to being cordoned by paths for high speed vehicles on all sides.
    - thfuran 3y ago
      Then why aren't you spending 100% of your income on trying to change policy regarding zoning/density and transit availability?
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        Probability of success is too low to make it a worthwhile investment. Also, affecting change in zoning/local efforts is useless. It would have to be a federal (and maybe global) level tax on fossil fuels, otherwise the arbitrage opportunities make it ineffective.
metabagel 3y ago
> It'd be taxing at whatever level is necessary to pay for the damages caused For global warming, the cost of the damage is astronomical.
- thfuran 3y ago
  But the cost per mile driven isn't. Regardless, pricing in externalities is about preventing market distortion by buyers foisting the costs of goods/services onto other parties, not about directly deciding what people are permitted or able to buy.

No, that's not what pricing in externalities is. It'd be taxing at whatever level is necessary to pay for the damages caused, not at the level that forces people not to do the damage.

lotsofpulp 3y ago

Nature does not offer the option of “paying for the damages caused”. We cannot fix it or replace it like a fungible good. You either prevent the damage from occurring, or you deal with the consequences. E.g. the damage to communities from being in isolated residences in unwalkable communities where kids cannot freely play outside has no dollar amount.

thfuran 3y ago
>We cannot fix it or replace it like a fungible good. That rather depends on exactly what we're talking about. CO2 can be stripped from the atmosphere, for example. It's just somewhat expensive. >E.g. the damage to communities from being in isolated residences in unwalkable communities where kids cannot freely play outside has no dollar amount. Sure it does. Even deaths have reasonably well established values, legally speaking. And things like expected future medical costs or lost productivity are much more straightforward to assign a value.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Our opinions will have to differ then. There is no number I would accept for the loss kids experience by not having a “right to roam” due to being cordoned by paths for high speed vehicles on all sides.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    Then why aren't you spending 100% of your income on trying to change policy regarding zoning/density and transit availability?
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Probability of success is too low to make it a worthwhile investment. Also, affecting change in zoning/local efforts is useless. It would have to be a federal (and maybe global) level tax on fossil fuels, otherwise the arbitrage opportunities make it ineffective.

metabagel 3y ago

> It'd be taxing at whatever level is necessary to pay for the damages caused For global warming, the cost of the damage is astronomical.

thfuran 3y ago
But the cost per mile driven isn't. Regardless, pricing in externalities is about preventing market distortion by buyers foisting the costs of goods/services onto other parties, not about directly deciding what people are permitted or able to buy.