"System change is now inevitable. Either because we do something about it, or because we will be hit by climate change. '...

"We need to develop economic models that are fit for purpose. The current economic frameworks, the ones that dominate our governments, these frameworks... the current economic frameworks, the neoclassical, the market frameworks, can deal with small changes. It can tell you the difference, if a sock company puts up the price of socks, what the demand for socks will be. It cannot tell you about the sorts of system level changes we are talking about here. We would not use an understanding of laminar flow in fluid dynamics to understand turbulent flow. So why is it we are using marginal economics, small incremental change economics, to understand system level changes?"

Friday, March 20, 2009

OK, So...


The rest of the sad tale is here.

2 comments:

David B. Benson said...

:-)

*sigh*

bi -- International Journal of Inactivism said...

The professional climate inactivist movement -- as exemplified by the Heartland Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Rush Limbaugh, John Theon, etc. etc. etc. -- is an "entertainment industry"? I think that's giving the inactivist movement too much credit.

Because it's primarily a noise industry.

Or, to put it more diplomatically, it's a weird sort of advertisement industry which uses a cocktail of techniques culled from mainstream advertisers, online Viagra peddlers, and Alex Jones.

-- bi