US credit rating downgraded to AA+

[Super Dude]

Y'know I have to agree.  It's the one thing that has always bugged me about economics in general, and free market capitalism in particular.  I mean sure one of the calculations made in Keynesian economics (at least according to my intro class) is the marginal pollution cost for any given action, but that in itself kinda bothers me.  In a way it gives companies the incentive to pollute just as much as they can get away with and as much as necessary to accrue the greatest benefit (read: profit), when what we really need is a calculation that provides the incentive to pollute as little as possible, and have that hold the standard rather than the marginal return.  Or failing that, a model that demonstrates that long-term returns are greater with less pollution despite greater short-term returns with more.

Note that I am using pollution as a catch-all term here, not to say it should be limited to overt industrial pollution.

[TL]

All joking aside.
I think the rating is shit. That Canada happens to be one of a handfull left with the AAA rating speeks volumes about how silly it is.

............and I'm Canadian.

How? Canada has a fantastic fiscal track record. Yes, Harper has fucked it up a bit in the past few years, but we ran surpluses for quite a few consecutive years, paying down a bit of our debt in the process, and even now, our deficit is a fairly small percentage of our GDP.
On top of that, largely thanks to policies enacted back when Martin was finance minister, we have one of the strongest banking sectors in the world. Our economy is heavily based on resources that there's a large and steady demand for. The Canadian dollar is quite strong these days, and one of the more stable currencies right now.

Why is Canada being AAA silly? I'll answer that for you; it isn't.

[Riceball]

Duh, cos its Canada; they surely cant be allowed to  beat the US at anything

[emindead]

I mean, in all the years I have been following economic policies, when governments have taken over private sectors, it was always because the private sector had failed on its own accord and something had to be done. Twiddling one's thumbs and wait for some magically appearing entrepreneur who provides the service would, in those cases, always have been disastrous to society. It seems AE supporters always block this "evidence" out.

rumborak

Is there any certain sector in particular you would like to discuss? Because on the overall spectrum people do ignore the fact that the state does grant some privileges to certain companies and prohibit others to enter and compete; by competition they could solve the issue much quicker than just by granting some private companies the privilege to act. Privileges hamper market solutions... I don't think AE are the ones ignoring your supposed "evidence" at all.

[emindead]

And this is what baffles me the most. People tend to naturally take this position, "if I were in the government I would solve this problem by doing X, then Y and finally Z" or "the government should do this, this and this." Where's the entrepreneurial approach to solving the problems without the need of the government?

[orcus116]

People that take that position are more often than not the last people who should be in charge of solving such a problem. It's like the janitor who rolls his eyes and bitterly brags about how he can run the company the best.

[emindead]

People that take that position are more often than not the last people who should be in charge of solving such a problem. It's like the janitor who rolls his eyes and bitterly brags about how he can run the company the best.

Which point are you referring, the governmental or the entrepreneurial approach?

[orcus116]

The citizen saying how they'd run the government.

[emindead]

gotcha.

[Scheavo]

And this is what baffles me the most. People tend to naturally take this position, "if I were in the government I would solve this problem by doing X, then Y and finally Z" or "the government should do this, this and this." Where's the entrepreneurial approach to solving the problems without the need of the government?

I don't know many people who think government should get involved in entrepreneurial work. Regulations are meant as protection; regulating a banking system protects from abuses by the banking system, and keeps them honest. In the case of many industries, the idea would be to protect people form the chemicals an entrepreneurial may want to use to address some market desire.  Like usual, you seem to take any safeguards on a free-market as a complete destruction of the free-market.

[Super Dude]

That's my reasoning too, actually. Not protectionism of the market or of big business from the people or from competition, but protection of the people from corporate exploitation.

[Riceball]

If you are taking a purely free market approach to these kind of problems, the best way to do things is to force companies to price in their externalities in order to change the relative prices of certain actions. In the case of climate change, you force companies to pay for emmitting carbon into the atmosphere. Simple, really hehe.

[Super Dude]

Unfortunately, Republicans hate anything with the word 'carbon' or the word 'tax' in it, so you can rule that out automatically.

[orcus116]

To be fair the two words together have formed some shady companies, like that one Al Gore owns that guilts people into pledging money into their own "carbon footprint". On point, though, the US does a tremendous job as far as pollutants go so I can easily see a US company getting taxed more for holding up their end of the bargain globally then looking around the world at places like China and India who do the same manufacturing but don't give a shit and go "hey what the fuck?".

[PraXis]

Unfortunately, Republicans hate anything with the word 'carbon' or the word 'tax' in it, so you can rule that out automatically.

We pay enough taxes. When you bring junk science into it (to make people like me pay even more) we just get more pissed. But playing Devil's advocate, take the average low/med income American... the EPA puts a bunch of restrictions on carbon emissions (aren't we carbon-based life forms?) and energy costs skyrocket for EVERYONE.... where does the money go? "Green" economies are bullshit. See Spain. People like oil, and we have a few centuries worth at our disposal.

[Adami]

the EPA puts a bunch of restrictions on carbon emissions (aren't we carbon-based life forms?)

............what?

[GuineaPig]

 




P.S. I feel like we should have a general "Global Warming" thread.  I think it's the biggest issue humankind is facing, and it's discouraging to see that so many people still have little to no understanding of it.

[MetalJunkie]

the EPA puts a bunch of restrictions on carbon emissions (aren't we carbon-based life forms?)

You do realize carbon emissions is referring to carbon dioxide as a byproduct of burning coal and other resources?