Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

To: George W. Bush

ping


3 posted on 10/16/2007 9:48:21 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: traviskicks

Unfortunately, I couldn’t post the article, but Ron Paul is now up to five percent in the latest gallup poll. This is the highest ever.


5 posted on 10/16/2007 9:57:40 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: xcamel

ping

Q But often the cheapest energy sources, which the market would naturally select for, are also the most environmentally harmful. How would you address this?

A Your question is based on a false premise and a false definition of “market” that is quite understandable under the current legal framework. A true market system would internalize the costs of pollution on the producer. In other words, the “cheapest energy sources,” as you call them, are only cheap because currently the costs of the environmental harm you identify are not being included or internalized, as economists would say, into the cheap energy sources.

To the extent property rights are strictly enforced against those who would pollute the land or air of another, the costs of any environmental harm associated with an energy source would be imposed upon the producer of that energy source, and, in so doing, the cheap sources that pollute are not so cheap anymore.


7 posted on 10/16/2007 10:00:49 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson