John Champagne

End poverty & promote sustainability: Charge high fees to industries that emit pollution, take natural resources or destroy wildlife habitat. Share fee proceeds

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@OpenAI When I ask about the best way to end poverty and promote sustainability, I get references to Fee-and-Dividend (largely due to my instructions in 'About me' and 'My goals'). I think everyone else still gets aspirational statements referring to SDGs and such.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@mcgibax @JunkScience I think that he's paid to mislead people, not be accurate.

(Is this the same Steve Milloy who used to go on Fox and say that second-hand smoke isn't bad for you, even after studies showed elevated respiratory illness in spouses of smokers?)

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@PabloGallet @JunkScience Each doubling has a similar effect of the previous doubling. What diminishes is the impact of each additional trillion tons. But we are still increasing the rate of extraction, so that is not as strong a point as you might imagine it to be.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@JunkScience Hydrocarbon fuels manufactured using energy from Molten Salt Reactors would serve just as well, but without the complication of vulnerable supply lines and costly military action as guarantor.

We don't have nice things, because we don't account for externalities.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@MazzucatoM Google AI says that you dismiss a fee or tax, as climate policy, as being too slow. But that describes a fee that is too low, not every fee. If the result of a fee is insufficient, that is a sign that the fee should be raised.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@MazzucatoM If our goal is not to make prices honest (account for externalities) and share natural wealth (share proceeds from environmental impact fees), we will not arrive at a place where we want to be.

Dishonest prices ensure that harm brings profit. So, harm persists, and grows.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@omgsidewalks Demand honesty.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@bren_geo @PeterDClack The temp. has risen by abt 1°C in the past 45 yrs.

When climate impacts of human actions are trivialized or denied, not much is said about ocean pH or opportunity costs.

Fee-&-Dividend can reduce the rate of extraction in support of frivolity, while prolonging access for basics

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@robinmonotti @_ClimateCraze What is your favorite argument against accounting for Time of Observation Bias? (I have never even seen an attempt at an explanation why TOB should be ignored.)
https://t.co/uLczSBDtMI

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@_ClimateCraze @John_of_Bexley Have you ever said why you think it's better to present temperature information without correcting for Time of Observation Bias?

I predict that, if all temperature data from stations that had consistent practice of morning readings, and all data from stations that shifted from

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@PanasonicDX4500 If news media do not want to discuss questions like, "Does natural wealth belong to all?", and, "What efficient and fair policy options would address the problem of economic externalities?", is it inevitable that the vacuum will be filled by nonsense?

Other neglected questions?

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@jgmac1106 You COULD be sharing a proposal for how to promote sustainability and end dire poverty. But you are not.

Are the goals not particularly important, in your view? Or do you see a flaw in the proposal that you think makes it other that what I claim? Reason to think it cannot work?

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@BjornLomborg People will make better decisions when (IF) we account for externalities.

Do you have a favorite policy for how to take account of economic externalities, so environmental impacts and depletion costs are reflected in pricse?

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@phlegmatitron @skdh To experience things vicariously?

Imagine how the people must have experienced a visit to the Temple, more than 2500 years ago, after it had long since been transformed into a high-volume slaughterhouse.

I get your point.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@ChrisMartzWX Anyone who finds hypocrisy offensive can call for honest prices.

Those who use resources or otherwise impact the environment will pay the price.

Fees charged proportional to impacts will give a signal about true costs, without prohibitions. Without subsidies

Share fee proceeds

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@_ClimateCraze @John_of_Bexley Have you ever said why you think it's better to present temperature information without correcting for Time of Observation Bias?

I predict that, if all temperature data from stations that had consistent practice of morning readings, and all data from stations that shifted from

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@LLBiggers @jkpgamer Do you think it's OK to let industries privatize the profits derived from depletion and pollution, and socialize the costs?

An alternative: Fees charged proportional to extraction and emissions and habitat destruction; Fee proceeds shared equally to all.
https://t.co/wenrDwKewV

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@LLBiggers Neither fossil fuel fans, nor detractors, want to attack the root of the problem of dishonest prices.

No need for subsidies to find the best solutions, if we account for externalities. The adamant refusal to address the root of the problem deserves the most emphatic protest.

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@_ClimateCraze @ecochampionhk When did predictions of rising average global temperature become evidence of fraud?

[John Champagne @TallPhilosopher]

@M_Simonyan Why is Russia murdering Ukrainians?

A different path chosen could have meant that your neighbor was also a friend.