I haven't read the whole thing but this one caught my eye from a few days ago. I think as long as we continue to externalize pollution damages so that the polluter does not pay, whether directly or even indirectly, then we will not have a well-functioning politico-economic system for addressing environmental issues. It is often assumed (ridiculously in my view) that "capitalism" means polluters should not have to pay for such externalities. This assumption in my view is incorrect and a huge problem for getting to a more mature and useful understanding of capitalist systems.
How Chemical Companies Avoid Paying for Pollution
DuPont factories pumped dangerous substances into the environment. The company and its offspring have gone to great lengths to dodge responsibility.
By David Gelles and Emily Steel
Oct. 20, 2021
[nytimes.com]
2
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
3 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Amerika means that the rich pay for nothing and the lesser coined pay for everything. If the rich pay for stuff they will not longer be rich.
dalefvictor
Level 8
Oct 25, 2021
0
Interesting as I just received a notice from "Union of Concerned Scientists." They attached a Big Oil Bingo card. [secure.ucsusa.org]
JackPedigo
Level 9
Oct 25, 2021
0
Problem is, if the big oil companies lost their subsidies it would mean higher prices for all of us. I bought my PriusC when the price of gas was high. This model was sold for about 6 years and then was discontinued. The reason was that fracking had lowered the price of gas and no one was concerned about buying a vehicle that got good mileage. Many went back to their giant SUV's, trucks and RV's. Again, lots of fingers pointing right back at us.
JackPedigo
Level 9
Oct 25, 2021
0