it's true that the bourgeoisie will (try to) shift the cost of high hydrocarbon prices onto the poor and working classes. But the costs of global warming will be shifted in a similar way. The key is the fight-back.
I don't know about "neoclassical models of 'peak oil.'" Rather, I'm saying that high prices of hydrocarbons -- from whatever source -- discourage the use of them (while their use causes global warming). I would rather have those high prices come from a carbon tax than from "normal" workings of supply and demand, since with the tax (in theory) the revenues could be used to compensate the poor for high gasoline prices, etc. rather than going into the pockets of Tony Hayward, Dick Cheney, and his ilk. Of course, where the revenues go depends on the fight-back. On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:33 PM, brad <[email protected]> wrote: >>right. As I've said, the world needs peak oil, so we can stop using > hydrocarbons. > -- > Jim Devine > ------------------------------------------ > Huh? The last time 'peak oil' was getting so much attention it did > zip to reduce the use of hydrocarbons and instead shifted the cost of > an overextended bourgeoisie onto the poorest of the poor through > increasing fuel and food costs. Burning fossil fuels is a big, big > problem but the solution won't come from neoclassical economic models > of 'peak oil'. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Jim Devine "Those who take the most from the table Teach contentment. Those for whom the taxes are destined Demand sacrifice. Those who eat their fill speak to the hungry of wonderful times to come. Those who lead the country into the abyss Call ruling too difficult For ordinary folk." – Bertolt Brecht. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
