Free market environmentalism by Walter Block Part 1
Uploaded by: takadi
Video Description:
Walter Block at the Fraser Institute explaining the relationship between free market economics and environmentalism.
Tags for this video: Block environment Environmentalism Fraser free global libertarianism market Paul pollution Ron Walter warming
Find more videos in the "News" category
See more videos uploaded by takadi
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Tell a friend:















Jack -- I would argue 99% of all pollution happens on subsidized land, gov't leased lands, or public land: Large Agri-Farms, Chemical Waste Dumping (legal or otherwise), Chemical Factorys - etc etc. There's no way to fix this in the commons -- the "greed" slides towards a small sector represented
by "senior" polliticians. The only way to fix it is to get gov't out of all markets. Central Gov't Only job should be Naval Oversight.
You ever heard of an extinct cow? Walter Block breaks this down quite smoothly.
I'll debate you on that page and let these good people be able to get a word-in-edge-wise, smile.
Elephants are not better off endangered than they would be privatized and free-range on privately protected lands. Just look what Ducks Unlimited did for Ducks and wetlands -- Privatized Land Management. When people pay 100% (zero subsidies) they take 100% care of their possessions.
The only individual is the Consumer - Self-Interest "free choice" - "free-responsibility" is Self-Rule, Self-Rule is Individual-Anarchism.
Workers are consumers. Ignore the whole sales thing too, I'm an anarcho communist, pointing out the way the market workds doesn't convince me.
A consumer transforms purchases into energy (food, fuel, amusement, knowledge etc) not for resale. A worker transforms labor-fuel (derived from consumption) into "product-service"
The other costs is the mental framework it sets up in the children. The least cost is the direct dollar amount. We pay out 93% of wages in taxes to cover all gov't waste (zero competitive measures).
Enormous water rights must be stolen from one group of people and give to the farmer. I was trained as an economist -- you'll have to trust me on the Factory Farm Subsidy issue.
In Connecticut (where I live) welfare is $300 a month (if they don't have children) they do get subsidiesed housing though. $300 is absolute shit to live on and most don't get jobs because they don't want to work *for someone else*. The boredom associated with no money usually leads them to drugs
and crime.
So, yeah -- it costs the individual less because of the welfare -- but the cost to neighbors, water ways, and American Taxpayers is diplorable.
All societies - poor and middle class are the innovators/entrepreneurs. In a free-society this is the only way to make high profits - to give it to the poor and middle class innovators. Welfare strips creative faculty bare. I'm black-indian-irish (by way of cuba)
I'm German/Irish/Cherokee (by way of rape and pillage)
If the possibility for regulatory advantages exist for one group of people then all people will form groups -- Who's going to pay for it? Answer: The people who duck the slowest (the middle class) - they have too many assets to evade and not enough to avoid
It was a joke, My great grandmother ws Cherokee but I was refering to the whole manifest destiny era.
You are a little Anarcho-Commuist (pinches cheeks) -- adorable. Jack: I am not arguing against any form of Anarchism, I'm arguing Involuntary vs Voluntary societies and more specificially I'm arguing for a transitionary 93% Anarchy as a base - from there we can transition toward 100% Anarchy of o
ne form or another. We live in a 7% Anarchy - Let's transition to a 93% Anarchy. Property theft from the upper 46million (upper 28%) will not work.
Also, I'm building a vehicle that will carry this Anarcho-93 Model -- a Society that's truly free will have many benefits beyond just philosophy and socializing. Octo