“As the United States and other advanced countries finally move to confront climate change, they will also be morally empowered to confront those nations that refuse to act. Sooner than most people think, countries that refuse to limit their greenhouse gas emissions will face sanctions, probably in the form of taxes on their exports. They will complain bitterly that this is protectionism, but so what? Globalization doesn’t do much good if the globe itself becomes unlivable.”
Those who have made it their ultimate goal in life to save the world from bad weather could, after sufficient time in office, have crippled the economic power of their fiefdoms to an extent that less religious countries, such as Russia or China, would simply not care anymore about their petty “carbon trade wars”.
This environmentalism thing has gotten way out of hand. On Wednesday, LewRockwell hosted a pretty scary article that outlines how determined humans can be in destroying their means of existence. Can you imagine our Dear Leaders stirring up the “greenished” masses to smash anything that prevents the advent of cool climate? With Krugman openly advocating trade wars, I’m not sure how far away that still is.
Paul Krugman’s article is suicidal. He warns the Chinese about trade sanctions, so lets talk about trade sanctions. Any sanction can bring our exporting industry closer to the final straw, meaning that potential trade war can only confirm our elites that this export-led economy HAS TO BE CHANGED to a more self sufficient form. If we Chinese changed the structure by abandoning the overdependence on exports, then our huge reserves of Treasury Bills would become worthless, meaning that our central bank would sell them up, therefore destroying one of the vital pillars of the Dollar based international monetary system.
God help us if “Chimerica” finally ends up becoming a chimera, ruining the current international monetary system shuttering the era of deglobalization on the New World Order.
Nevertheless, I should appreciate that American-centric Neo-Keynesian for being so suicidal, because then after the collapse of the dollar we can FINALLY talk about the alternatives for the international monetary system, making the Classical Gold Standard more possible than ever.
“History needs a big push”, to quote Lenin. THANK YOU Krugman for pushing history
Disregarding the fact that governments ignore property rights by allowing polluters to pollute others’ property, what evidence is there to conclude that:
“Global warming” is occuring.
“Global climate change” is somehow different than spring, summer, fall, winter.
That either “global warming” or “global climate change” is caused by human action.
That neither “global warming” nor “global climate change” is not caused by the sun.
That proposed means of combating “global warming” or “global climate change”, such as government intervention, will kill less people than letting the market solve the problem.
Ah, the wonderful strawman. Now Giles, you know better. It’s clear from Krugman’s writings that he simply wants the accolades of power. He’s no more an economist than, say, Grima Wormtongue was a trusted assistant.
Mankiw, Stiglitz, Keynes, Friedman Sr, Friedman Jr, Coase, Carson, Buchanan, Solow, Samuelson, Hicks, Caplan, Cowen, Ricardo, Mill, Tullock, Phelps, Alchian, Demsetz, Arrow. Out of these which do you guys give your blessings to as economists?
And why are those that you do any different to Krugman. See, I can safely say I think they’re all economists, because I admit Krugman is, he’s just wrong. On the other hand you’re going to have to say why some are economists and others aren’t, without looking like a hypocrite because you’re being partisan.
