Eugene Coyle wrote:
I agree with Barkley that this is a frightening and urgent problem. My
take is that Gore and Clinton haven't had and don't have a serious
intention of doing anything about it, posture as Gore will.
Well, it'd require massive changes in U.S. life just to get back to
1990
A lot of lefties want to blame evil corporations for global warming,
and while they're no angels, the real solution would mean profound
changes in everyday life for almost all of us. How do we get there?
Doug
Not by ignoring the problem. Not by having the Vice President show up
at lots of
Brad DeLong wrote:
Pray for cleaner technology and raise the CAFE standards!
has praying ever done any good?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
warming talks failure
One or two should do it.
mbs
My hunch is that no one else on pen-l cares about this other than you or I,
Barkley. We can take it up over a drink in New Orleans. Enough drinks and
I'm sure you'll see it my way.
Peter
they are
violated in practice, which is possible for both.
Barkley Rosser
-Original Message-
From: Peter Dorman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 3:42 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:5061] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: global warming talks failure
At 01:30 PM 11/29/00 -0500, you wrote:
Max,
Heck, I'll take both you and Peter, and
maybe even the irascible Devine One up
on that, :-).
start pouring...
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
If I understand this, you are frontloading the political hassle by building the
progressive tightening of the standard into the initial regulation. If the
political juice is there, that's always a good thing to do...
Lisa Ian Murray wrote:
If we set
stringent targets that do as you say, how
Maybe this is the time to vent an idea I've been carrying around...
The Kyoto negotiations are an example of global quasi-governance processes that
are proceeding fitfully but are absolutely essential to our future. I would add
third world debt-reduction to this list, also global labor
warming talks failure
If I understand this, you are frontloading the political hassle by building
the
progressive tightening of the standard into the initial regulation. If the
political juice is there, that's always a good thing to do...
Lisa Ian Murray wrote:
If we set
stringent targets that do
s :-)
Ian
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter Dorman
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 12:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:5114] Re: RE: Re: global warming talks failure
If I understand this, you are frontloading the politi
G'day Doug,
Louis Proyect wrote:
Actually most people value peace and health more than shopping at the
malls
and cancer. That is the reason drug use and prozac is so widespread in the
USA. Beneath the "good life" there is a profound feeling of despair.
...but which can't get articulated as
Mike Lebowitz's book, BEYOND CAPITAL, deals with these issues of Marx's
deterministic vision. In a nutshell, Marx deliberately minimized the role
of the self-organization working class in CAPITAL, in order to focus on the
contradictory dynamics of capital, which create conditions in which
Jim Devine wrote:
Mike Lebowitz's book, BEYOND CAPITAL, deals with these issues of Marx's
deterministic vision.
While they have somewhat different agendas, and clash on some issues,
Wood, Foster, and Harvey are all very good on the mixture of deterministic
and non-deterministic elements in
PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, November 27, 2000 6:17 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:5026] Re: Re: Re: global warming talks failure
Under traditional regulation, each polluter is supposed to limit pollution
to
some specified level. Some may find it feasible to cut pollution even
more,
so that the overall target
Doug,
This is one reason why I am in favor of various
"flexible mechanisms" including a reasonably
structured market mechanism. This is indeed a
global problem and the issue is getting global
emissions down. Therefore I have no problem
with, for example, the US paying other countries
to
"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
Peter,
Thanks for the reference.
There is nothing stopping
a firm that owns the right to emit a certain amount of a
given pollutant to emit less.
No, but under a tradeable system the underpolluting firm sells its excess to
another firm that
From an offlist discussion with Lou Proyect
I would say that the big opening for Marxism here,
aside from the general critique of profit-oriented
firms driving things, is for how one determines
the overall level of emissions. Although it was
done through an international negotiation, good
le for both.
Barkley Rosser
-Original Message-
From: Peter Dorman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 3:42 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:5061] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: global warming talks failure
"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
Peter,
One or two should do it.
mbs
My hunch is that no one else on pen-l cares about this other than you or I,
Barkley. We can take it up over a drink in New Orleans. Enough drinks and
I'm sure you'll see it my way.
Peter
Jr.
Peter,
Thanks for the reference.
There is nothing stopping
a firm that owns the right to emit a certain amount of a
given pollutant to emit less. But it cannot emit more.
Ceiling implies a maximum above which one cannot
go. A floor is a minimum below which one cannot go.
Under traditional regulation, each polluter is supposed to limit pollution to
some specified level. Some may find it feasible to cut pollution even more,
so that the overall target (permitted pollution level times number of
activities) serves as a ceiling. Under tradeable permits, all such gaps
A lot of lefties want to blame evil corporations for global warming,
and while they're no angels, the real solution would mean profound
changes in everyday life for almost all of us. How do we get there?
Doug
Actually most people value peace and health more than shopping at the malls
and
Louis Proyect wrote:
Actually most people value peace and health more than shopping at the malls
and cancer. That is the reason drug use and prozac is so widespread in the
USA. Beneath the "good life" there is a profound feeling of despair.
...but which can't get articulated as despair. If I
23 matches
Mail list logo
