"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?"

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Haven't Given up on Climate


Stay tuned.

Meanwhile, there is this. Chart from American Progress. Photos from the recent rally in Austin Texas, photographer yours truly.

Note that 44 billion dollars is $130 per capita, or about $500 per household, or about $50,000 per top-percentile-household. Since we are clearly undertaxed in aggregate, the Bush tax cuts amount to a transfer of $500 from every household among the poorest 90% of households to every household among the richest 1%. I wish somebody could explain this effectively to the tea party. That same $50,000 going the other way would really have a lot more utility.

I think it would be crazy to let the richest 10% off the hook and just increase taxes on everybody else $500. But even that would be sensible compared to what is actually happening in response to this engineered crisis.

2 comments:

David B. Benson said...

Right on.

Robin Hood Principle for this century

Hank Roberts said...

Worth a look:
http://www.barrettbellamyclimate.com/page3.htm

Grade school/high school presentations, one page per idea, one or two illustrations per page.