4 ms·

As a libertarian, if there's one thing I don't like about Libertarianism[0], it is specifically the economists. The problem with libertarians of all stripes is

As a libertarian, if there's one thing I don't like about Libertarianism[0], it is specifically the economists. The problem with libertarians of all stripes is that we're blind to informal power structures[1]. In right-wing libertarian economics this manifests as: - A supreme allergy to competition law. - Externality denialism as a nervous tic. As an example of the latter: >When climate change replaced population growth as the looming catastrophe that all of the authorities insisted something should be done about, I took the same approach to that issue and reached the same conclusion. I'll give this guy the benefit of the doubt solely because overpopulation was, as far as I can tell, veiled Nazi shit. On the other hand, the argument against climate change here boils down to "well humans will adapt", which... I mean... technically yes? The biggest adaptation is going to be people moving out of their home countries, which isn't an option for the vast majority of humanity. Immigration is not recognized by most countries as a right. If we bake the Middle East or Africa and it becomes unlivably hot, the answer countries are going to choose isn't going to be "admit hundreds of millions of climate refugees". I'm absolutely one of those "migration is a human right" people, and if David Friedman is anything close to consistent, he'll be too. But most governments are run by people who vehemently disagree with that and you're not going to sell people on open borders as an alternative to climate change mitigation. Also, some of the actual arguments this guy uses are just... oh my god: - Sea level rise isn't a problem because most land will not be flooded. Land ISN'T FUNGIBLE, improvements on land CAN'T BE MOVED, and the people getting flooded can't sell their homes to Aquaman. As an economist, it's your literal job to know this. - Warming is Good Actually because more people die of extreme cold than extreme warm. How are you THIS sure global warming will only result in local warming?! Global warming is an average, and so far, we've seen local increases in both warming and cooling (e.g. the polar vortex weakening). Yes, humans can adapt, but that adaptation isn't anywhere close to free, and that cost is not going to be borne by the people emitting. [0] Capital L, or right-libertarianism specifically. And of course excluding all the authoritarians cosplaying as libertarians because being the Supreme Leader feels a lot like freedom if you squint. [1] See also: The Structurelessness of Tyranny, which was targeted at left-libertarians

DavidFriedman 2y ago
Sea level rise isn't a problem because the amount projected is tiny, in contrast to the rhetoric. Less than a meter by the end of the century, about half the difference between high tide and low. Land doesn't have to be fungible for decreasing available land by about twenty thousand square km and increasing available land by about ten million (https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/land-gained-and-lost)to https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/land-gained-and-lost)t... be a net gain. What is your reason to expect warming to increase temperature related mortality? Are you assuming that it makes hot times and places hotter and cold colder? That is inconsistent with the IPCC projections, which show both minimal and maximal temperatures rising. It's true that adjusting to changed circumstances costs something but warming so far has been about a tenth of a degree a decade, may be rising to two tenths, pretty slow change compared to all the other changes people are adjusting to. That aside, why do you think the temperature of a century ago was optimal? It wasn't designed for us, we weren't designed for it, and it varied much more over parts of the world where people lived successfully than it is going to change in the next century. If you, or any reader, is interested in my arguments, which are not mostly about adaptation, you can find my climate posts at: http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Sorted_Posts.html#Climate http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Sorted_Posts.html#Climate
protocolture 2y ago
>As a libertarian, if there's one thing I don't like about Libertarianism[0], it is specifically the economists. I have the opposite experience. Like every libertarian group I was in shit their pants and lit their hair on fire when covid hit. Most established libertarian thinkers (at least the ones I largely identify with) looked at it both A rationally and B as old vulnerable people and actually appraised the situation with a modicum of sense. Heck I got banned from an economic historians page, because I was on the friendslist of someone who was screeching at him about covid being 5g or something. He just cleaned house. >The biggest adaptation is going to be people moving out of their home countries, which isn't an option for the vast majority of humanity. Immigration is not recognized by most countries as a right. If we bake the Middle East or Africa and it becomes unlivably hot, the answer countries are going to choose isn't going to be "admit hundreds of millions of climate refugees". I'm absolutely one of those "migration is a human right" people, and if David Friedman is anything close to consistent, he'll be too. But most governments are run by people who vehemently disagree with that and you're not going to sell people on open borders as an alternative to climate change mitigation. Yeah this is true. Even within a single country, if a certain area becomes unihabitable, people will (likely by force) migrate to where it remains habitable. I put this as an argument to some people claiming Australia is more mighty than Indonesia. Indonesias fishing fleet, is mostly 100% capable of coming to Australia. (people have crossed that water in jetskis, stopping to refuel) They have roughly 600,000 ships. Like counting everything above a canoe that has to register with their authorities. If they coordinate even a little bit, theres nothing 3 frigates and 4 growlers could meaningfully do to slow that down. They will make landfall and probably take over north australia. Heck they could make multiple trips. And thats not including Indonesias military or shipping fleets. Thats just fishing. The average capacity of these boats is like 8 people. 16 if overloaded. Thats heaps of people. Lots of people will die in the attempt but if they are driven from their homes and hey happen to be adjacent to the ocean its game over.

DavidFriedman 2y ago

Sea level rise isn't a problem because the amount projected is tiny, in contrast to the rhetoric. Less than a meter by the end of the century, about half the difference between high tide and low. Land doesn't have to be fungible for decreasing available land by about twenty thousand square km and increasing available land by about ten million (https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/land-gained-and-lost)to https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/land-gained-and-lost)t... be a net gain. What is your reason to expect warming to increase temperature related mortality? Are you assuming that it makes hot times and places hotter and cold colder? That is inconsistent with the IPCC projections, which show both minimal and maximal temperatures rising. It's true that adjusting to changed circumstances costs something but warming so far has been about a tenth of a degree a decade, may be rising to two tenths, pretty slow change compared to all the other changes people are adjusting to. That aside, why do you think the temperature of a century ago was optimal? It wasn't designed for us, we weren't designed for it, and it varied much more over parts of the world where people lived successfully than it is going to change in the next century. If you, or any reader, is interested in my arguments, which are not mostly about adaptation, you can find my climate posts at: http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Sorted_Posts.html#Climate http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Sorted_Posts.html#Climate

protocolture 2y ago

>As a libertarian, if there's one thing I don't like about Libertarianism[0], it is specifically the economists. I have the opposite experience. Like every libertarian group I was in shit their pants and lit their hair on fire when covid hit. Most established libertarian thinkers (at least the ones I largely identify with) looked at it both A rationally and B as old vulnerable people and actually appraised the situation with a modicum of sense. Heck I got banned from an economic historians page, because I was on the friendslist of someone who was screeching at him about covid being 5g or something. He just cleaned house. >The biggest adaptation is going to be people moving out of their home countries, which isn't an option for the vast majority of humanity. Immigration is not recognized by most countries as a right. If we bake the Middle East or Africa and it becomes unlivably hot, the answer countries are going to choose isn't going to be "admit hundreds of millions of climate refugees". I'm absolutely one of those "migration is a human right" people, and if David Friedman is anything close to consistent, he'll be too. But most governments are run by people who vehemently disagree with that and you're not going to sell people on open borders as an alternative to climate change mitigation. Yeah this is true. Even within a single country, if a certain area becomes unihabitable, people will (likely by force) migrate to where it remains habitable. I put this as an argument to some people claiming Australia is more mighty than Indonesia. Indonesias fishing fleet, is mostly 100% capable of coming to Australia. (people have crossed that water in jetskis, stopping to refuel) They have roughly 600,000 ships. Like counting everything above a canoe that has to register with their authorities. If they coordinate even a little bit, theres nothing 3 frigates and 4 growlers could meaningfully do to slow that down. They will make landfall and probably take over north australia. Heck they could make multiple trips. And thats not including Indonesias military or shipping fleets. Thats just fishing. The average capacity of these boats is like 8 people. 16 if overloaded. Thats heaps of people. Lots of people will die in the attempt but if they are driven from their homes and hey happen to be adjacent to the ocean its game over.