Comment at CiF

Peter Tatchell:

"free trade need to be subordinated to sustainable policies for the survival of humanity."

This is something I really don\’t understand about you Greens (ie, the political party, not environmentalists in general). What is it that you\’ve got against trade? By the division of labour and the subsequent trading of the production, for any given level of resource use we get a higher standard of living. Or, for any given standard of living, we use fewer resources.
Since you\’re all concerned about the use of resources, I really don\’t get the antipathy to trade. Why do you oppose the very thing which gives what you want, lower resource use?

9 thoughts on “Comment at CiF”

  1. I think you miss the point, Tim. The saving of the environment is not the issue here. The argument is with higher standards of living. If someone is enjoying a higher standard of living then (in the Green mind) it is concomitant that someone else must have a lower standard of living in order to fund the imbalance. It’s all about ying and yang. I don’t believe these people give a stuff about the environment, it’s merely the same old communist nonsense hiding under a green blanket. They’re trying to get the world to sign up for their distasteful social creed by disguising it in a cloak of green respectability. I used to do a similar trick with my children’s vegetables in order to get them to eat them.

  2. There’s an element of authoritarianism (and of pastoral Blake-ish nostalgia) in the Green Party, sure – but the more sensible ones believe that the current prices associated with free trade don’t reflect the true costs.

    As Jim says, when shipping uses 5% of global energy consumption, there’s got to be a question of whether that’s really the best use of resources (how taxed is fuel oil for large ships? Not very if at all, I suspect).

  3. The problem is so much of the green argument is based on guesstimates. and people with an axe to grind will bend figures to fit their prejudice. It’s the dodgy green science that I find hard to swallow.

  4. BlacquesJacquesShellacques

    “there’s got to be a question of whether that’s really the best use of resources”

    That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

    There is no ‘best’ use of resources independent of subjective human wishes. Resources are not resources absent people wanting them, they are lumps of flint. The only thing that gives value is human desire. Value is the very definition of human desire.

    Jesus H. Fuckin Christ, I am stunned.

  5. Venture Creature

    Since production uses (US analysis) 83% of energy used in food production, compared to 11% for wholesale distribution, it is most likely ‘greener’ to choose produce that is far away but produced with less energy – perhaps because it is warmer clime not requiring a greenhouse. But that requires rational analysis.

  6. “That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.”

    No, you’re an idiot.

    Let’s assume petrol is taxed at £1,000,000 a gallon when used for fuel, but is tax-free for tramps to drink. Therefore, most petrol is bought by tramps to drink and very little is used for fuel.

    Do you think:

    a) this is the best use of resources;
    b) this is not the best use of resources.

    If b), then you agree with my point on shipping.

  7. Börse im Jahre 2009 Minus

    von Raivo Pommer

    Sorgen über die Auswirkungen der Finanzmarktkrise haben den deutschen Aktienmarkt am Mittwoch den dritten Tag in Folge belastet. Nach zeitweise kräftigen Verluste im Tagesverlauf erholte sich der Leitindex Dax jedoch weitgehend und schloss mit minus 0,28 Prozent bei 4205 Zählern. Die Erholung wurde durch die amerikanischen Börsen ausgelöst, die zum europäischen Handelsschluss in Plus gedreht hatten. Der MDax gab um 1,12 Prozent auf 4952 Zähler nach, der TecDax büßte 0,5 Prozent auf 480 Punkte ein.

    „Die Finanzmarktkrise belastet die Märkte nach wie vor“, sagte Fondsmanager Gerold Kühne von LLB Asset Management in Vaduz, Liechtenstein. „Erst wenn die Konjunkturdaten in den Vereinigten Staaten eine Bodenbildung anzeigen, könnte das vom Markt als ein positives Signal verstanden werden.“

    Am Tropf von Wall Street

    Für die späte Erholung im Dax verwies ein Händler aus Frankfurt vor allem auf die Vereinigten Staaten: „Wir hängen wieder ganz am Tropf der amerikanischen Börsen. Geht es dort runter, haut es auch den Dax nach unten. Geht es dort hoch, hilft das auch der Börse hier.“

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *