Carbon emission reduction: News and technology

[Brian Peacock]

Mac doesn't like it because it implies capitalists are selfish and rapacious. Mac might not be a selfish capitalist, but a hell of a lot are.

To be fair, mac often says that capitalism needs more democratic oversight or regulation to curb its rapacious tendencies. Unfortunately, as we're saying, the 'debate' about regulation only ever seems to push in the other direction.

[pErvinalia]

I'm just winding him up. He's the only capitalist we have left now...

[Brian Peacock]

I'm just winding him up. He's the only capitalist we have left now...

tehe To be less generous, if someone says that there's nothing wrong with capitalism as a system, it's failure is to be found in the people doing it, as mac has done in the past, then I would suggest that that person doesn't really understand what 'the economy' is, or capitalism as a system of social organisation, or the nature of the problems a capitalist economy causes for everyone in society - ardent capitalists included.

[Svartalf]

I thought it was malthus who was all about scarcity and limited resources?

[Brian Peacock]

I thought it was malthus who was all about scarcity and limited resources?

You could easily call Hardin a neo-Malthusian, see:
First as Tragedy, Then as Fascism: Ecologist Garrett Hardin’s enduring gift to the nativist right

[Brian Peacock]

Escaping the Tragedy of the Commons through Targeted Punishment
Johnson, Royal Society Journal, 01 Aug 2015 (open access)

Abstract

Failures of cooperation cause many of society's gravest problems. It is well known that cooperation among many players faced with a social dilemma can be maintained thanks to the possibility of punishment, but achieving the initial state of widespread cooperation is often much more difficult. We show here that there exist strategies of ‘targeted punishment’ whereby a small number of punishers can shift a population of defectors into a state of global cooperation. We conclude by outlining how the international community could use a strategy of this kind to combat climate change.

[macdoc]

I dunno - there are fair few countries with mixed economies and the best GINI scores.
........and Adam Smith remains wrong

[pErvinalia]

What was he wrong about?

[Svartalf]

maybe because he encouraged people to follow their darkest impulses and hoard on publicly necessary resources for their own personal benefit at the expense and worse of the rest of the population?

[JimC]

I suspect that mac meant that Adam Smith believed that all economies are solely driven by market forces, whereas the reality is that other forces also operate. Also, Smith implied that trying to modify market forces is at best futile, and at worst liable to damage the economy.

[macdoc]

Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand"
Concept:
Adam Smith's theory of the "invisible hand" suggests that individual ambition, when pursuing self-interest, unintentionally benefits society as a whole, leading to an optimal outcome for everyone.

How it works:
This is the idea that a market with self-interested individuals will naturally lead to the best result for the community.

John Nash's Contribution
Nash Equilibrium:
Nash developed the theory of the Nash equilibrium, a situation in a game where no player can improve their outcome by unilaterally changing their strategy, assuming the other players' strategies remain unchanged.

The Caveat:
Nash's work showed that if everyone focuses only on what's best for themselves, the group's outcome might be poor.

A Better Way:
His concept suggests that the best overall outcome often occurs when individuals consider what's best for themselves and the group, or when they cooperate.

for which he won the Nobel Prize

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, but that (Smith) has got nothing to do with tragedy of the commons. Tragedy of the commons is an argument against that type of self interest. And Nash's ideas are an equivalent to the tragedy.

[Brian Peacock]

Yeah, but that (Smith) has got nothing to do with tragedy of the commons. Tragedy of the commons is an argument against self interest. And Nash's ideas are an equivalent to the tragedy.

Garrett Hardin's original metaphor was more an explanation of the operation of (white) self-interest, which he used to argue that some people (immigrants, blacks, Jews, the mentally etc) should not just be excluded from access to necessary resources but shouldn't even be allowed to breed. This doesn't necessarily undermine the metaphor, but I think it's something to remember when we deploy it - that it can be (and has been) used exclusively as well as inclusively.

[pErvinalia]

Fair enough. But it does apply to this thread from an environmental sense.

[Brian Peacock]

Absolutely. Our "commons" in this sense are all the components of the biosphere which are necessary for life - all things that keep Earth within it's zone of viability; within planetary boundaries. Sure we can have discussions about the use and distribution of the Earth's natural resources, but things like the chemical composition of the atmosphere, or the water, carbon, oxygen and nitrogen cycles are not something that can or should be traded away for profit, imo.