tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post3321711914638474321..comments2024-03-27T03:00:27.024-04:00Comments on Facts & other stubborn things: "Because screw it"Evanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12259004160963531720noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-42473754853343057002012-01-06T18:48:24.655-05:002012-01-06T18:48:24.655-05:00To sum up, it isn't that Krugman favors one or...To sum up, it isn't that Krugman favors one or another climate policy necessarily (I forget - does he favor markets or taxes?); it is the sort of statements he makes about what climate science can know.Lord Vaderhttp://lordvader.empire.sith.jedisuck.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-1398229145375901842012-01-06T18:42:27.688-05:002012-01-06T18:42:27.688-05:00Sorry, meant to answer this question:
What counts...Sorry, meant to answer this question:<br /><br />What counts as alarmism? <br /><br />When you start talking about current events as if they can be directly attributable as a "known known" to climate change I call that alarmism. That's what a lot of alarmists do. A recent example is the flooding up in New England when Irene moved through. There were all kinds of claims about this sort of thing never happening in New England, but there is a long history of it - though each instance is distant in time - New England was pounded in a similar way in the 1930s for example.Lord Vaderhttp://lordvader.empire.sith.jedisuck.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-35310584850268550102012-01-06T18:35:40.029-05:002012-01-06T18:35:40.029-05:00Krugman may be the most brilliant economist ever (...Krugman may be the most brilliant economist ever (I have clue one about that and I leave that for economists to duke it out over); but he makes just the strangest, off the wall, outlandish statements when it comes to climate science. To me it looks like climate alarmism; you'll have to decide whether you think that is the case.<br /><br />This is just one example of what I am getting at: http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2011/02/krugman-loses-perspective.htmlLord Vaderhttp://lordvader.empire.sith.jedisuck.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-40023084586429704832012-01-06T18:23:43.277-05:002012-01-06T18:23:43.277-05:00Do you really consider Krugman an alarmist?
What ...Do you really consider Krugman an alarmist?<br /><br />What counts as an "alarmist" for you? Wanting to implement some climate policy?<br /><br />I consider "alarmists" people who talk like they know the world is going to end and that the economy must grind to a halt as a result.Daniel Kuehnhttp://www.factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-53075527228423438852012-01-06T18:20:18.498-05:002012-01-06T18:20:18.498-05:00No, I got your point. You aren't getting my p...No, I got your point. You aren't getting my point. I don't see anyone saying "screw it" on all things; they say screw it on things they are really very confident about (generally for not very good reasons). <br /><br />Take the example that you use; carbon taxes. There really is no good evidence that carbon taxes will do diddly; they are pimped at the COP meetings as a magic bullet (when you go to them they are a religion to some people); and people love them because they look relatively clean and simple. But if you look at them (or a trading regime) they do remarkably little for a very high price - and they do remarkably little because it is politically (and in good conscience) infeasible to make them draconian. So I'm not interested if they are at the "right price," I don't _think_ they'll ever work - but they sure do look like this really photogenic solution. <br /><br />The most confident people who are willing to say "screw it" (climate alarmists like Gore and Krugman and deniers like Inhofe, etc.) are just the worst when it comes to the whole field of climate science. <br /><br />Thus the reason one should rarely if ever say "screw it" is because that tends to be the time your biases and such at their highest level.Lord Vadernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-57650707549655426292012-01-06T16:51:05.676-05:002012-01-06T16:51:05.676-05:00I would pedanticallty also note that it's not ...I would pedanticallty also note that it's not just about the likelihood of getting a positive outcome. It's fair to add in expected value along with some risk aversion.<br /><br />But so long as we do that, policies should follow whatever our Bayesian priors our. Things like public choice should change our Bayesian priors, but they do not change questions of government intervention to all or nothing things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-18100706272574136622012-01-06T11:12:02.190-05:002012-01-06T11:12:02.190-05:00To use your example - I'm going to continue to...To use your example - I'm going to continue to muse about why we give gifts on Christmas vs. Epiphany. But I'm not going to withhold gifts from my family until I figure it out.Daniel Kuehnhttp://www.factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-58966883628729896082012-01-06T11:10:59.456-05:002012-01-06T11:10:59.456-05:00I think you're missing my point, LV.
I'm ...I think you're missing my point, LV.<br /><br />I'm not saying <i>"don't think about things"</i>.<br /><br />I'm saying <i>"don't use our failure to ever completely comprehend things as an excuse for not taking action"</i>Daniel Kuehnhttp://www.factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-79040432183637526652012-01-06T11:08:23.349-05:002012-01-06T11:08:23.349-05:00"Way too many people get way too analytical a..."Way too many people get way too analytical about actually taking action on things, particularly when it involves political answers."<br /><br />Yet you're constantly analyzing this stuff. You can't even leave X-mas gift giving alone. Physician, heal thyself.Lord Vadernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-83897500749049214272012-01-06T05:56:05.001-05:002012-01-06T05:56:05.001-05:00Well-said, Daniel. You could also add that we live...Well-said, Daniel. You could also add that we live in a non-linear world with agents that have non-linear decision-making processes. But that will be the day that orthodox economics replaces the dominant paradigm of Subjective Expected Utility, which is still pretty damn entrenched and will continue to be for a while...Blue Auroranoreply@blogger.com