"One legitimate reason for refusing to endorse massive, worldwide government-led efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions is that any such effort will inevitably be politicized. Even if the possibility exists for such regulation to make the world a better place, this possibility is remote compared to the likelihood that grandstanding politicians, special-interest groups, arrogant environmentalists who are intolerant of commercial values, and well-meaning but misinformed voters will combine to generate policies that do more harm than good.
More fundamentally, the relevant question – as always – is ‘compared to what?’ The polar ice caps might well be melting, the earth’s temperature might well be rising, and human industry and commerce might well be the culprit. But this ‘culprit’ is also humankind’s great savior. It keeps us from the fates suffered by the vast majority of our ancestors: famine, plague, filth, drudgery, and ignorance."
Monday, December 19, 2005
A Note on Global Warming
Don Boudreaux:
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Pollution & Cancer
In the New York Times:
"His analysis of cancer statistics leads Dr. Peto to this firm conclusion: 'Pollution is not a major determinant of U.S. cancer rates.'"This review piece is well worth a look.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)