"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?"

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Morning Memes

The internet has been cussedly interesting this morning:





I'm finding myself thinking about Stoat vs McKibben (and not The Book) but I'm not sure I have anything interesting to say about it. As I see it they are both right. Is that even possible?

Also: probably few reading will have missed this, but for what it's worth, the high-tech NYTimes story clarifying the Greenland ice situation, so different from what we expected 15 years ago. It's interesting also in that it's exemplary and likely a milestone in what digital media can do that books and magazines cannot.


4 comments:

Jim Eager said...

"This is Truth" is mislabeled in the diagram: it is in fact just another version of "True." That's because what appears to be a solid cylinder could be a hollow bucket with the open end facing away from the cyan light source. And so it is with arguments as well.

Michael Tobis said...

a strange quibble. "Truth" makes no claim about the part of the shape that is out of view.

Jim Eager said...

Precisely, Michael, that's why it is just another "True."

Steve Bloom said...

Apparently Solzhenitsyn never got the chance to meet James Watson.