On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Michael Perelman <[email protected]> wrote: > I thought that this was important. I wonder why it has not elicited any > comments. > > > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 10:53:11AM -0800, Gar Lipow wrote: >> The most recent issue of LBO observed that so-called command & >> control may be good policy to fight climate change, but did not seem >> to have many political legs, and asked for advice on how to build a >> popular movement. This post is just the beginning of a reply, >> observing that not only is their U.S. popular support for "command & >> control", there is STRONG popular support. > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > michaelperelman.wordpress.com > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >
In case it was missed the first time - here is a link to the full article http://www.grist.org/article/why-not-structure-climate-bills-to-win-popular-support Although I link only to a few polls a full range of polls shows the same results over decades. Spending public money on trains and renewable energy and similar types of infrastructure is popular. Regulations requiring more efficient energy use and more renewable energy use are popular. And not weak "people wanted to please the pollster by taking a position" popular. But "we like this even if it costs us money" popular. It seems like there should be some way we can make this matter. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
