[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=CA renter][quote=jstoesz]What are the ECONOMIC benefits of AB32?[/quote]
Are economic benefits the only metric we use to determine if something is worthwhile? What about health benefits, or quality of life benefits? Are those worth nothing?[/quote]
CAR: While I think you make an excellent point, I think its also fair to ask what this will really cost.
Being a California kid myself, and growing up during the 1970s in the Bay Area, I too remember how truly crappy the air quality was. While we didn’t it have nearly as bad as Los Angeles or the Valley, I remember those Stage 1 alerts vividly and the dreaded “inversion layer” (we actually had a few days off school due to extremely bad air quality).
So, I would never argue over achieving better air quality, but as EconProf points out, the costs are becoming truly prohibitive. And, in attempting to have a meaningful dialogue, you find yourself being shouted down by the Lunatic Left, which treats every question as religious heresy. As Katie Couric (that journalistic giant) opined: “The science is settled”. Well, no, it isn’t. There’s no such friggin’ thing. We’re still debating issues that date back hundreds of years, as new data, techniques and technologies drive things forward.
I’d like to see real data, real costs and real benefits and then have a discussion based on that.[/quote]
Allan,
Yes, you’re absolutely right about the need to evaluate the true costs and benefits of any environmental regulation/policy. Econ Prof made good points WRT diminishing returns, and I really can’t disagree with anything s/he has said. Still, I just wanted to point out that the “benefits” might not be economic — it still might be worth it (or not).
