HT New Matilda.
Recent Comments
- Nicholas Gruen on Orwell that ends well: Can evaluation save us from ourselves?
- Nicholas Gruen on Will you join me in the alt-centre?
- Nicholas Gruen on A conservative liberal social democrat
- Nicholas Gruen on A metaphor, a hack, a ladder: On the difficulty of telling yourself the truth
- Nicholas Gruen on Orwell that ends well: Can evaluation save us from ourselves?
- Nicholas Gruen on Trust and the competition delusion: A new frontier for political and economic reform
- Nicholas Gruen on Adam Smith was a feminist economist: Care – the essay
- Two types of strategy: Part One | Club Troppo on Cometh the hour: Paul Krugman’s Nobel
- Nicholas Gruen on Where equity and efficiency thrive together: Can you propose some more examples?
- The strange alchemy by which we built a world of bullshit | Club Troppo on “Values based management”
- Nicholas Gruen on Will you join me in the alt-centre?
- The NDIS: there, but for the grace of God, go us all | Club Troppo on Vale Ford
- johnrwalker on Figuring out the strange new rules of resource constraint
- johnrwalker on Figuring out the strange new rules of resource constraint
- Nicholas Gruen on Figuring out the strange new rules of resource constraint
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Categories
-
Authors
Archives
Author login and feeds
Academic
Alternative media (Australian)
Alternative media (international)
Arts
Business
Centrist
Economics and public policy
Left-leaning
Legal
Online media digests
Psephology/elections
Right-leaning
… but we’re all ears when it comes to the concerns of billionaire mining magnates.
On technical matters I would be inclined to back a successful miner against a thespiain:)
Just tell them that their power bills are going to go up but it won’t make a tick of difference to the weather. That will probably make them lean forward in their chairs.
Very dissapointed that you’re (or appear to be) a fellow traveller with the climate do nothings Rafe.
Given the do somethings won’t do anything to the climate, your dissapointedly dissmissive dissing is dissingenuous, Nicholas.
“Very dissapointed that you’re (or appear to be) a fellow traveller with the climate do nothings Rafe.”
Science is a vast tax-eating, statist, left-wing conspiracy. You ought to know that, Nicholas.
We’d best listen to the Anal Randyites and fellow-travellers, as they are more than just fly-wire doors, fetid bores and fisting whores. Heck no, collectively yet as rugged individualists, they’ve tossed Monty Bird’s salad, pummeled Plimer’s plumbing, lugged Andrew’s bolt and choked Lindzen’s lizard in search of an inconvenient truth. And alas, they have verily spilt the whisker of deceit and stepped in a nugget of wisdom. And it is this:
Carbon Dioxide is Our Friend
Maybe they should have gotten Paul Hogan to do the ad.
Hoges: “Everyone knows I don’t approve of giving money to the government …”
“… but this time I’m making an exception.”
*cut to shot of Kakadu*
It is disappointing to see Fyodor doesn’t believe or perhaps understand the power of changes in relative prices.
“Changes in relative prices” of WHAT, Homerkles?
Are you suggesting that La Gillardine’s Trace Gas Tax is going to alter the world’s incentives towards the consumption of fossil fuels? If so, demonstrate how, with sources. I’ll give you a gold star and pink elephant if you can work a lame pun in there – play to your strengths.
Fyodor
Substitution due to changes in relative prices is one of the fundamental axioms of consumer economics. If you don’t accept this, then you don’t accept microeconomics. Bought many bananas recently? (Although this effect will hopefully be temporary.)
A carbon price in Australia is not intended to affect the world’s incentives – just those of firms and people in Australia. Garnaut and many other people have pointed out that carbon pricing will affect investment decisions, and it will also affect individual consumer’s decisions, even if people are fully compensated.
Missing the point…
…getting the point.
Altering economic incentives in Australia, a trivial contributor to CO2 emissions under any conceivable future scenario, will likewise make a trivial impact upon global emissions, therefore a negligible impact on climate.
If you don’t accept this, then you don’t accept the economic reality.
Fyodor,
I am a post-graduate student not an ageing fast bowling guru.
I am able to share his resources on occasions such a this.
Ross Garnaut talks about relative prices affecting people’s choices as Peter has stated.
A couple of accounts of Ross Garnaut in Adelaide last night, both from the same source.
The first is from a (sane) parallel Earth
http://adelaideclimatenews.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/garnaut-sparks-riot-on-parallel-earth/
The second is a more straightforward what-was-said.
http://adelaideclimatenews.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/garnaut-in-adelaide-the-straight-dope/
Comments and questions welcome
Yairs – spin is more your style, Homerkles.
No shit.
Now answer the question that was put to you. How will tax policy in a emissions-irrelevant country affect the coming Warmageddon?
Rafe,
It is not a matter of technical expertise (although I cannot see why a mining businessman should have a better understanding of climate science than an actress) but about underlying motivation.
The miner obviously has a strong interest in playing down AGW or carbon pricing and is likely to do so irrespective of his beliefs. The actress, by comparison, is disinterested and more likely to be sincere.
You should discount their stated views accordingly.
Victor – He was a very good batsman.
Nicholas, this is the correct sentence:
“Very dissapointed that you’re (or appear to be) a fellow traveller with the climate don’t do something pointlesslys Rafe.”
I noticed way back in catholic school that penance seemed a bit pointless.
http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/carbon-prices
Hmmm, no link to the final report.
“GREG COMBET: As I said before, I haven’t had the chance to read it yet so when I have I’ll be able to answer your question specifically. But it is a very important piece of work, I anticipate, and I know how much Mr Windsor in particular has been looking forward to seeing it because he’s seeking an insight from an independent body with the qualifications the Productivity Commission has to give him an idea of what is going on in other economies with which we trade and in particular what implicit and explicit carbon prices there may be and I’m sure that will inform his approach to these discussions to a significant degree.”
But we’ll just forge ahead any way.
fyodor,
just for your edification.
Victor is a post-graduate student.
He is a very good scorer at cricket and knows the history of Australian like no other prson I have met.
Given he is not Australian that is no mean feat.
He helps me out at cricket and I help him out in other ways!
Your question is pretty lame really. A Carbon tax/ETS adresses the problem of Co2 in Australia not the World.
Given they’re likely to be exposed to engineering, geological and environmental issues as well as engaged in long-term economic planning I would contend that mining executives would have a vastly better informed opinion on climate change than your typical NIDA graduate.
As someone trained to fake sincerity, she’s certainly more likely to appear sincere. Whether she’s sincerely disinterested or not depends or not whether she stands to gain personally from the publicity and the opportunity for conspicuous social display that she’s been given gratis. I suspect not, and discount accordingly.
“The actress, by comparison, is disinterested and more likely to be sincere.”
Disinterested? Why do people have no trouble realising that money is not the only major motivating factor in peoples lives unless considering the likely sincerity of one’s beliefs? Money is not the only thing we value and therefore it is not the only basis for determining whether people are disinterested in particular policy issues.
I reckon that Bob Brown not-so-secretly would like to pare back our economy; and that’s not because he is disinterested, but because he has substantial, and no more or less honourable, non-monetary preferences he is promoting.
“Substitution due to changes in relative prices is one of the fundamental axioms of consumer economics. If you don’t accept this, then you don’t accept microeconomics. Bought many bananas recently? (Although this effect will hopefully be temporary.)
Could I get a few examples fo how this works? With regards to electricity provision?
The relative price changes for simple items say a can of coke v a bar of snickers OK I can see the influence of price or income changes.But how deos this play out for the price of my gas or wood for heating? I live in a regional area and don’t have much chice of suppliers.
Across the population are the economists expecting all consumer goods will have relative price changes ? If so as I asked on another thread apart from an expectation that suppliers will not raise prices to those of their least effective competitor why won’t the producer/ supplier try to capture any energy efficiency gain fior themselves?
As way of pleading for a bit of leeway asking these questions I have just started helping a daughter with her assignemnts in Microeconomics at Macquarie Uni!
Pedro,
Did I mention money?
Dave, you said the actress is disinterested while the businessman is not. What is the difference between them on the issue if it is not money?
Murph, I’m guessing you will substitute less for more electricity use if you are feeling the cost increase. Depending on how the compensation affects you it might not make any difference. Or you might decide to put on an extra jumper or sweat a bit more and pocket the money. Chances are, you will in some degree be worse off.
To the extent the changes lead to generation substitution from lower to higher cost sources we will have reduced productivity.
There was a story in the Courier Mail yesterday that one of the reasons power prices are going up locally is lower use of air con during our cooler summer. I wonder whether that effect is factored into the compensation calculations?
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/06/02/quiggin-back-of-the-envelope-numbers-on-carbon-tax-v-gst/
Well done, you’re having a massive cry over a 1% price rise that you should be able to at least partly mitigate. Seems like a reasonable action given the potential future costs if we don’t deal with AGW.
Also, thanks for giving me a chuckle pedro – it’s good see how quickly the anti-tax crowd has to resort to conspiracy theories about ‘greenies that want to pare back the economy’ when challenged. Must do wonders for your credibility.
Pedro,
Job description, career, reputation, relationships with peers.
As Fyodor suggests, the actress may not be entirely disinterested in these areas, but the businessman will have a much stronger and more direct interest.
Rage-quit, you mustn’t have noticed when Uhlman called out bob Brown on his coal industry shut down policy. But I’m happy you got a laugh, even if out of your own ignorance.
Yes, Uhlmann made a lot of accusations about wanting to ‘close the industry down’. Brown said we need to transition to renewables over coming decades. The tories in the UK just committed to huge emissions cuts BECAUSE they know that said transition will generate loads of jobs for them. So, please explain how Bob’s suggestion that we move gradually away from coal is the same as a desire to, in your words, ‘pare back the economy’?
Still laughing, at you and your tinfoil hat.
It is all about not adding more and more ‘new’ (fossil coal) carbon to the system.
Fossil carbon is mostly coal.
Oil is getting scarce, its market cost will soar any way. (The clearing and draining of wet peat forests for oil palms for Bio fuel substitutes is a significant emmiter , hopefully common sense will stop it).