[Update a couple minutes later]
Related: opponents of the Keystone Pipeline are naive, according to Austan Goolsby. Does that include Barack Obama?
[Update a couple minutes later]
Related: opponents of the Keystone Pipeline are naive, according to Austan Goolsby. Does that include Barack Obama?
Comments are closed.
I notice that the abundance argument has been applied to the resources of society, but not other systems such as ecological systems or political representation. We can throw a bunch of taxes on the “1%” without problem, but slight changes in ecological systems must be resisted. Similarly, advertising and other such meager power that businesses (“corporations” in the tongue) wield is considered outsized, dominating the power that governments hold.
I just see this as more hypocrisy from this particularly viewpoint. Whether or not a system is deemed too fragile to exploit, depends solely on whether the exploitation furthers the interests of the “99%”. This innumeracy always falls to their advantage.
To continue, in the article Epstein mentions that minimum wage advocates are partial to endless tweaking by government. Now consider a similar attitude towards global warming. That’s geoengineering in a nutshell. Most such people would be horrified by tweaks of Earth’s climate, but they have no such qualms about doing the same to Earth’s economy.