If you were told that you had a fatal disease and a Doctor told you how to get better, but then an economist came along and told you that the cost of treating you would be too high so it would be better not to do anything - would you sit there and wait to die?
It's that kind of inane logic that governs this quote from Cato Institute Senior fellow, Jerry Taylor who said, "scientists are in no position to intelligently guide public policy on climate change." Scientists can lay out scenarios, but it is up to economists to weigh the costs and benefits and many of them say the costs of cutting emissions are higher than the benefits".
Enough is enough and in what media is calling an unprecedented move, over 200 climate scientists have signed a petition urging government leaders in Bali this week, to take urgent action on climate change, stressing that the clock is ticking and that the time to act now is upon us.
Today's action follows last week's petition signed by over 150 global business leaders calling for a 50% cut in emissions. On the one hand we have a huge body of scientists from around the world who study what is happening to the planet and are raising major alarm bells and on the other hand, we have the business leaders who drive the economy calling for action. What stands to delay us are the very people we elected to represent us in the first place. (Or at least appeared to be elected.)
Thanks to Think Progress for pointing us to this article.
Only part time economists
Shouldn't those same economists ask for the externalities of carbon emissions to be internalized, so the market functions better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
I was under the impression that most economists agree that a carbon tax is the best way of doing that. It sure beats doing nothing.
Personally I view anyone who used to claim climate change was a hoax, and now claims there is nothing we can do with a bit of skepticism.