It’s astonishing what he doesn’t understand

The claim that economists have lost control is based on the absence of a cost-benefit analysis in the Green New Deal and the fact that carbon pricing is rejected.

Of course, the Economist is wrong. There is a cost-benefit analysis in the Green New Deal: we cannot afford not to do it, whatever it costs.

And carbon pricing does not work. Marco Fante explains why here. The essence is simple though: renewables are cheap enough to ensure that carbon pricing is itself priced out of the market.

So, a carbon tax raises the price of emitting technologies, reducing the relative price of non-emitting.

OK

Our task with climate change is to replace emitting with non-emitting technologies.

‘K.

Renewables are now so cheap that we don’t need a carbon tax to change those relative prices.

Fine.

So, we’re done then, right? Everyone will, from now on, install non-emittive technologies as they’re cheaper and we’ve solved climate change.

So why is Ritchie insisting we still need the Green Leap Forward?

23 comments on “It’s astonishing what he doesn’t understand

  1. ‘It’s astonishing what he doesn’t understand’

    Can’t say I agree with this Tim – when you’re dealing with an utter cretin and the singularly most moronic ‘mainstream’ commentator extant in Cyberspace today then nothing astonishes.

    ‘But the green political economists have won. As I always thought we would, one day, which is why I kept on banging on about this.

    It’s taken a while. But the Economist should note, the change is seismic. And for the sake of the planet, irreversible.’

    And who are we to argue with someone who ‘would could have been one of those people at Dachau’ – indeed under his plans arguing with him could well lead to a jail sentence….

  2. Due diligence? What climate change? There is no decent evidence for it, and don’t tell me a consensus of people who make a living out of it agrees that it exists.

  3. ‘There is a cost-benefit analysis in the Green New Deal: we cannot afford not to do it, whatever it costs.’

    Then why do the analysis?

  4. “renewables are cheap enough to ensure that carbon pricing is itself priced out of the market”

    This is probably the result of our recent shoot in Berlin for the first title in our new series

    “Murphy Taxes Berlin…He makes them squeal”

    All condoms, lubes and sextoys used on the shoot were bio-degradable when they weren’t reusable. He is green at heart and so were the men and women who got to be “taxed” to their uttermost by him

  5. “we cannot afford not to do it, whatever it costs”

    Do what? Turn the USA into Venezuela? No way is global warming going to be that bad.

  6. From an acquaintance regarding this article:

    I find Richard Murphy’s writing on economic justice very encouraging and thought provoking.

    I didn’t honestly expect better – the gentleman is of the wet, lefty, religious nature and haps in to any “feels so nice it must be right” bandwagon going.

    But it’s a horrible thing to find in a work machine. Although not as bad as Dr Bateman.

  7. Maybe Rocco was involved in this?

    “Tinder-style app for cows tries to help the meat market (BBC): Following the example of Tinder, UK farming start-up Hectare has launched its own equivalent for livestock and called it Tudder. The app features data profiles of animals from 42,000 UK farms in an effort to help farmers find the perfect breeding partner for their cattle.”

  8. ‘There is a cost-benefit analysis in the Green New Deal: we cannot afford not to do it, whatever it costs.’

    This is from a qualified accountant, one that once insisted he was an expert at management accounting and that a mere ACMA with over 20 years experience shouldn’t dare to disagree with his mighty intellect and wisdom

  9. renewables are cheap enough to ensure that carbon pricing is itself priced out of the market.

    Has anyone asked him if he uses only “renewable” sources of energy for his home and car? And if not, why not?

  10. “Has anyone asked him if he uses only “renewable” sources of energy for his home and car? And if not, why not?”

    Unless he genuinely lives “Off Grid” he won’t be able to use ONLY renewable sources. The grid doesn’t supply special electrons to “Green” customers, even if they mistakenly assume it does. Cut them off (by Smart Meter), when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun isn’t shining, and it might surprise them. I can just hear the howls of protest….

  11. renewables are cheap enough to ensure that carbon pricing is itself priced out of the market.

    If any government is stupid or corrupt enough to listen to people like this, and also gets a polar vortex descend on their country like the one last week, literally tens of thousands of their citizens will die, freezing to death, and if the remaining shivering survivors have any sense they’ll burn their government buildings down to the foundations and start again.

  12. “bloke in spain
    February 12, 2019 at 4:30 pm

    Is this his New Green Deal or the Green New Deal of the Ocasión-Cortes puta? Colour me confused.”

    Same here. Because if he’s talking about *hers* – there’s no possible way we could ever afford to do it. If we would, literally, all die without it – then we’re going to die because what she wants is physically impossible.

    He would also need to explain why providing money to those ‘unwilling to work’ is necessary to save the world.

  13. “Bloke in Wales
    February 12, 2019 at 7:02 pm

    renewables are cheap enough to ensure that carbon pricing is itself priced out of the market.

    Has anyone asked him if he uses only “renewable” sources of energy for his home and car? And if not, why not?”

    Even then, ask him how his home’s solar panels were built, how his clothes were made, how the cookies in front of him got made.

    When he’s completely self-sufficient – *then* he can lecture other people about how they need to do the same.

  14. Given the issues some greens have with over population being one of the issues I would have thought not providing money to those unwilling to work might be their more preferred policy

  15. Misfit, but it’s correct in the sense that it would be better if there were real non-emitting trchnologies. However, all examples of non-emitting technologies I have encountered emit massive amounts of destructive emissions in their creation.

  16. BniC said:
    “Given the issues some greens have with over population being one of the issues I would have thought not providing money to those unwilling to work might be their more preferred policy”

    They seem to prefer to kill off the rich.

    Although given their dream of a subsistence agriculture society, I’m not sure how much help those “unwilling to work” are going to be when the vegetable patch has got to be dug.

  17. “There is a cost-benefit analysis in the Green New Deal: we cannot afford not to do it, whatever it costs.”

    He’s effectively assuming that there is an infinite cost to doing nothing, and therefore an infinite benefit to doing something to prevent it. But is that true?

    Someone here will know – what is the IPCC prediction if we just carry on as we are now? Is it that human life on earth becomes impossible? If so, then he might have a point*. Is it just that things get worse and more difficult? If so, then there’s a cost to doing nothing, so a benefit to doing something about it – we can therefore measure it and see if the cost of his proposed action is worth the benefit.

    (*but even if that’s true, there are still different things that we can do, with different levels of benefits and costs, so it’s still worth doing the analysis)

  18. ‘The claim that economists have lost control’

    Can’t get past that. Economists in control? Where? When?

    Billions will die if it ever happens.

  19. @Rob
    if the remaining shivering survivors have any sense they’ll burn their government buildings down to the foundations and start again
    That should work. As long as they ensure all the politicians are inside at the time.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.