3 ms·

Summary: if it doesn't hit the bottom line of the polluter, then there is no reason for them to change their behavior. That's pretty obvious, but the message n

Summary: if it doesn't hit the bottom line of the polluter, then there is no reason for them to change their behavior. That's pretty obvious, but the message needs to be hammered in over and over. The bigger issue is that game theory gets in the way - if pollution is taxed here, it will be exported to places where it is not.

waveBidder 2y ago
The nice thing about being a massive market like the US is that you can impose regulations that producers in other countries need to follow to be able to participate in the market. It does make enforcement harder, but as long as you have the political will its definitely feasible. O/c having the political will is an entirely different thing.
- detourdog 2y ago
  Another way to look at is the USA is overdeveloped that we have a duty to make everything as advanced as possible. Which raises the sophistication of other nations.
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  > It does make enforcement harder We've overthrown foreign governments for smaller reasons. It's more a question of political will than anything else.
  - ebiester 2y ago
    We can't even stop slave labor, something the world universally has gone, "this is bad." Hard problems are hard.
- quacksilver 2y ago
  Don't people just create backdoors? Example: The US has banned lots of Chinese stuff. The stuff now sneaks across the border into southeast Asia, or goes to a final assembly plant there and becomes Vietnamese or Cambodian. There are _supposed to_ be supply chain records and audits in many cases, though reality often doesn't match paperwork...
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    In the same way that we shouldn't outlaw murder because sometimes people get away with it anyway
    - phil21 2y ago
      Probably should work on catching a few murderers and figuring out an even moderately effective enforcement mechanism before pretending you can make more stuff illegal. Otherwise people just laugh at you as you further undermine any perceived authority you once had. We have done close to nothing to enforce the current tariffs and such, allowing blatant country of origin laundering to go the whole time with next to zero enforcement action. You can bring a ready to prosecute case to regulators and they do utterly nothing. Adding more to this regime would just be yet more performative nonsense to make some people feel good about themselves. We need far less of that in this world.
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/importer-agrees-pay-798334-resolve-allegations-underpayment-customs-duties https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/importer-agrees-pay-798... https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ford-motor-company-agrees-pay-365m-settle-customs-civil-penalty-claims-relating https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ford-motor-company-agrees-pay... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-228-million-settlement-civil-fraud-lawsuit-against-vitamin https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-2... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl/pr/us-attorney-lapointe-announces-76-million-settlement-civil-false-claims-act-lawsuit https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl/pr/us-attorney-lapointe-an... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-1-million-settlement-civil-fraud-lawsuit-against-trading-company https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-1... Now if you're just arguing the penalties need to be stiffer: sure! But on a cursory search, I don't believe it's fair at all to say we've done "close to nothing" or there's "next to zero enforcement action" or regulators "do utterly nothing" or it's "performative nonsense". What evidence do you have to back up your claims? It seems like perhaps you've actually brought a ready-to-prosecute case forward? Curious to learn!
debo_ 2y ago
For carbon pricing specifically, border carbon adjustments are being developed as an analogue to duties to blunt the effectiveness of "pollution exports." The EU is the farthest ahead on this. See: - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Carbon_Border_Adjustment_Mechanism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Carbon_Border_Adjustment_... - https://citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanisms-what-are-they-and-why-do-they-matter/ https://citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/carbon-border-a...
- linotype 2y ago
  The EU is also doing a great job of cutting emissions by virtue of being in the dumps economically. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw2zydnv7lo.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw2zydnv7lo.amp
trimethylpurine 2y ago
I wonder if the biggest hindrance to good corporate behavior might be the fiduciary responsibility to the investor that was established with Dodge vs Ford.
coliveira 2y ago
It is very interesting when capitalists confess that capitalism itself will never solve these issues. It throws away delusional thinking by the uninformed. Any hope of solving environmental issues rests in having a government that is powerful enough compared to the market and willing to work against businesses main financial interests. We're just seeing the example of tech companies, which for years paraded around as earth saviors with pledges of "carbon neutrality", just to discard any such plans when competition for AI supremacy makes them spend as much energy as they possibly can, as quickly as possible, the environment be damned.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  I mean that line of thought has been core to capitalism from the start though. The originators of capitalism argued that it needed strong governments to stop/prevent the negative aspects of capitalism (such as stopping collusion and monopolistic behavior). By it's nature and from the beginning one of capitalism's core requirements is that capitalism cannot function without a framework of rules and enforcement mechanisms that only a strong government can provide.
  - coliveira 2y ago
    It needs to be a government that is not controlled by companies and billionaires.
    - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
      Agreed. All of the original capitalist thinkers specified that very very clearly.
- ebiester 2y ago
  Okay, so I agree with many leftist critiques of capitalism, but we can also tell that communism also caused environmental destruction, particularly in the soviet block. Mixed economies are not doing that much better - see the Norwegian sovereign fund as but one example. Further, I'd argue that the opposite of a weak state is a totalitarian one, not a socialist one. And I'm arguing that the problem is you need over 200 governments to agree on both it and its enforcement, and that the wealth disparity between countries in and of itself will cause game theory issues for these sorts of agreements to break down, even if each government was enlightened socialist. Capitalism is making it worse, to be sure, but socialism is not a solution here in and of itself.

waveBidder 2y ago

The nice thing about being a massive market like the US is that you can impose regulations that producers in other countries need to follow to be able to participate in the market. It does make enforcement harder, but as long as you have the political will its definitely feasible. O/c having the political will is an entirely different thing.

detourdog 2y ago
Another way to look at is the USA is overdeveloped that we have a duty to make everything as advanced as possible. Which raises the sophistication of other nations.
kelseyfrog 2y ago
> It does make enforcement harder We've overthrown foreign governments for smaller reasons. It's more a question of political will than anything else.
- ebiester 2y ago
  We can't even stop slave labor, something the world universally has gone, "this is bad." Hard problems are hard.
quacksilver 2y ago
Don't people just create backdoors? Example: The US has banned lots of Chinese stuff. The stuff now sneaks across the border into southeast Asia, or goes to a final assembly plant there and becomes Vietnamese or Cambodian. There are _supposed to_ be supply chain records and audits in many cases, though reality often doesn't match paperwork...
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  In the same way that we shouldn't outlaw murder because sometimes people get away with it anyway
  - phil21 2y ago
    Probably should work on catching a few murderers and figuring out an even moderately effective enforcement mechanism before pretending you can make more stuff illegal. Otherwise people just laugh at you as you further undermine any perceived authority you once had. We have done close to nothing to enforce the current tariffs and such, allowing blatant country of origin laundering to go the whole time with next to zero enforcement action. You can bring a ready to prosecute case to regulators and they do utterly nothing. Adding more to this regime would just be yet more performative nonsense to make some people feel good about themselves. We need far less of that in this world.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/importer-agrees-pay-798334-resolve-allegations-underpayment-customs-duties https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/importer-agrees-pay-798... https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ford-motor-company-agrees-pay-365m-settle-customs-civil-penalty-claims-relating https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ford-motor-company-agrees-pay... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-228-million-settlement-civil-fraud-lawsuit-against-vitamin https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-2... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl/pr/us-attorney-lapointe-announces-76-million-settlement-civil-false-claims-act-lawsuit https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl/pr/us-attorney-lapointe-an... https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-1-million-settlement-civil-fraud-lawsuit-against-trading-company https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-1... Now if you're just arguing the penalties need to be stiffer: sure! But on a cursory search, I don't believe it's fair at all to say we've done "close to nothing" or there's "next to zero enforcement action" or regulators "do utterly nothing" or it's "performative nonsense". What evidence do you have to back up your claims? It seems like perhaps you've actually brought a ready-to-prosecute case forward? Curious to learn!

debo_ 2y ago

For carbon pricing specifically, border carbon adjustments are being developed as an analogue to duties to blunt the effectiveness of "pollution exports." The EU is the farthest ahead on this. See: - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Carbon_Border_Adjustment_Mechanism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Carbon_Border_Adjustment_... - https://citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanisms-what-are-they-and-why-do-they-matter/ https://citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/carbon-border-a...

linotype 2y ago
The EU is also doing a great job of cutting emissions by virtue of being in the dumps economically. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw2zydnv7lo.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw2zydnv7lo.amp

trimethylpurine 2y ago

I wonder if the biggest hindrance to good corporate behavior might be the fiduciary responsibility to the investor that was established with Dodge vs Ford.

coliveira 2y ago

It is very interesting when capitalists confess that capitalism itself will never solve these issues. It throws away delusional thinking by the uninformed. Any hope of solving environmental issues rests in having a government that is powerful enough compared to the market and willing to work against businesses main financial interests. We're just seeing the example of tech companies, which for years paraded around as earth saviors with pledges of "carbon neutrality", just to discard any such plans when competition for AI supremacy makes them spend as much energy as they possibly can, as quickly as possible, the environment be damned.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago
I mean that line of thought has been core to capitalism from the start though. The originators of capitalism argued that it needed strong governments to stop/prevent the negative aspects of capitalism (such as stopping collusion and monopolistic behavior). By it's nature and from the beginning one of capitalism's core requirements is that capitalism cannot function without a framework of rules and enforcement mechanisms that only a strong government can provide.
- coliveira 2y ago
  It needs to be a government that is not controlled by companies and billionaires.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    Agreed. All of the original capitalist thinkers specified that very very clearly.
ebiester 2y ago
Okay, so I agree with many leftist critiques of capitalism, but we can also tell that communism also caused environmental destruction, particularly in the soviet block. Mixed economies are not doing that much better - see the Norwegian sovereign fund as but one example. Further, I'd argue that the opposite of a weak state is a totalitarian one, not a socialist one. And I'm arguing that the problem is you need over 200 governments to agree on both it and its enforcement, and that the wealth disparity between countries in and of itself will cause game theory issues for these sorts of agreements to break down, even if each government was enlightened socialist. Capitalism is making it worse, to be sure, but socialism is not a solution here in and of itself.