Status Updates From Philosophical Foundations o...

"It would be better to insist upon the simple and powerful conception of fairness that informs the basic principle of carbon pricing, then leave it up to politicians to ply their trade, by devising ways of convincing the electorate to do the right thing."

for book that is self described as the "realistic way to get some climate legislature"-this is your mission statement?your thesis how things are ought to be done??

"Again, this is consistent with the basic normative position being defended here, which is that it is only the gratuitous production of GHGs that should offend our moral sensibility and that constitutes unfairness to those who must shoulder the costs."
?????????????????????

"This reflects a set of “built-in biases” that “tilt strongly toward endorsement of business as usual, and rejection of health and environmental protection." One can see laid out here a set of psychological associations, used to trace out a pattern of moral contagion that they believe starts with the evil of the market."

how can you be so condescending and so stupid ???

HE SAYS: "After all, no one is talking about turning public parks into actual commodities."
AND THEN IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS WITH: "Just thinking about the good as if it were a commodity is not itself a harm, and does not violate any taboo against the buying and selling of it."

???????????????????????????

"Carbon pricing fails to satisfy distributive justice concerns for the same reason that every other price in the economy fails to satisfy those same distributive justice concerns—because the market is designed to achieve efficiency, not equality."

THIS IS LITERALLY THE NEXT SENTECE!!!!!!!!!!
like you are so close jesus christ

"It is difficult to see how anyone can seriously maintain, on one page, that climate change is a looming environmental catastrophe and yet, on the next page, reject the most efficient carbon abatement regime, merely because it fails to satisfy an ideal conception of equality that no other institution in the world satisfies."

my brother in christ

"Thus Shue is basically willing to scuttle an efficient carbon-pricing regime
in order to push for a disconcertingly crude and politically unworkable regulatory alternative. The problem stems ultimately from the fact that he has a philosophical view that rules out any workable scheme."
1/2

"The objective of a carbon-pricing regime in the near term is not to stop global warming from occurring. It is intended to reduce warming to the point where that which does occur is justified, by the magnitude of the benefits associated with the activities that produce it."

this is your one argument of what we should do about climate change. and you don't even .... anyway sure.

"Once one realizes, however, that the industrial processes that generate climate change as a byproduct are ones that stand poised to deliver enormous benefits to future generations, then a simple prohibition on
harm fails to motivate concern over anything less than extreme climate change."

god this is so fucking stupid.

"Human population growth is in many respects a more severe threat to the environment than climate change."

ah yes, why did i not see the forced sterilization of global south argument coming.

"I cannot see any reason to think that this problem should prove resistant to human ingenuity, given the enormously more complicated problems that people have been able to resolve when appropriately incentivized. As a result, there is simply no reason for environmentalists to be opposed to economic growth. They should merely insist that it be “clean” growth."

this is so stupid.

"Thus when CNC advocates say that certain forms of natural capital “cannot be substituted for” by manufactured capital, what they often mean is “cannot be substituted for at reasonable expense."

guys i cannot. i cannot do another 200 pages of this.

"If future generations are going to be suffering an embarrassment of riches, then it follows that they should be able to fix these problems without much hardship (or with less hardship than we would experience), which in turn reduces the extent to which we should be worried about them."

god we lost the plot so badly. like my notes at this point are just "???????what????". not even counterpoints, just question marks.

this is a psa for my prof and my prof only: COUNT YOUR MF DAYS. WHEN THE “RATE THE COURSE/ PROFESSOR” TIME COMES I SHALL REIGN MY VENGEANCE FOR U FORCING ME TO READ THIS GARBAGE.

"Many academics have a moral sensibility that is exquisitely attuned to the detection of even the faintest injustice, and are highly resistant to the suggestion that any one problem can be resolved without facing “deeper” or “structural” issues, such as the legacy of colonial violence, or the inequalities of the neoliberal trade system."

LIKE WHAT DO U WANT ME TO SAY ? they really be giving doctorates to just anyone

"Apart from the issue of species extinction, it is almost misleading to characterize climate change as an “environmental” problem at all. It is a set of problems caused by changes to the environment...that affect primarily people and that threaten the “built environment.” Climate change is, first and foremost, a threat to complex human civilization, particularly through its impacts on agriculture and infrastructure."

"Thus policymakers have turned to environmental ethicists for counsel on how to proceed. Unfortunately, the responses they have received have been quite unhelpful. Environmental ethicists have been unable, or unwilling, to answer the specific normative questions that arise within the policy space because, almost without exception, they reject the entire conceptual framework that structures the policy discussion."

"The remainder of the discussion will be focused entirely on the policy debate, which is a discussion carried out among those who maintain a good-faith commitment to solving the problem of climate change, but have a number of unanswered questions about what should be done or what constitutes a reasonable response."

??????????? u sound like a leader of MLM.

"I will be ignoring entirely arguments and issues that have been put forward by those who are acting in bad faith. There is a great deal of demagoguery, confusions and lies that structure the political debate over climate change policy. This is, it seems to me, something of a waste of time in an academic publication, since those who have been misled by such claims are not likely to be among the readers of this book."

" The real difference, and the reason that economists have
achieved such influence over policymakers, is that they always have something useful to say about the relative merits of the policy options that are actually on the table."

MF I AM ON THE PAGE 4 don't play with me oh my god