Phil Henshaw wrote: > Well, as an alternate to the CO2 game solution we could create a virtual > China and pay it the estimated real cost to the earth of China's > products and only pay the real China the price they'd accept. > Then we could use the money (essentially the blood money for > China's environmental exploitation) to pay smart guys like you and me to > think of great things to do with the money! ...well I suppose some > better use should be proposed before anyone votes on it.. but you > would clearly begin to have "the full cost of [the] demand reflected in > [the] supply".
I believe that what you are proposing is called a tariff. The US has given up its right to impose such tariffs to an international organization that does not support this type of action. > China's sudden wealth is based largely on their finding a way to break > in on someone else's business world and not follow a lot of the > unwritten standards (common practices and expectations) and catching > that host world quite off guard. Another problem with buying from China (figuratively and specifically) is that we keep rediscovering the consequences of their not following unwritten or written standards. The current pet food poisoning scandal is an example of this effect. The Chinese don't care that wheat and rice gluten is contaminated as long as it meets the contract requirements for protein levels. So far, we're lucky that this has only affected our pets (I'm not downplaying that effect - one of mine has been harmed - I'm just being realistic) and not people. The same products from the same sources are used in human foods. > The broader idea I had in using that phrasing was that the full price of > what we buy is often hidden from the buyer (like throwing the world out > of balance). One of the things the price mechanism is horrible at > reflecting is future costs and consequences. If we were to do something > about the few select distortions of the price mechanism that could be > identified with some confidence, and bias the markets for them, it would > be called 'steering'. Now you're talking about actions that have caused wars in the past. There are future costs and consequences and there are future costs and consequences. -- Ray Parks [EMAIL PROTECTED] IDART Project Lead Voice:505-844-4024 IORTA Department Mobile:505-238-9359 http://www.sandia.gov/scada Fax:505-844-9641 http://www.sandia.gov/idart Pager:800-690-5288 ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
