dialogues
columns
- Oscars 2008
The mystery of Rebecca Miller's dress is solved!
Kim Masters
posted Feb. 25, 2008 - Oscars 2008
E-mail debates of newsworthy topics.
Troy Patterson
posted Feb. 25, 2008 - Let Us Leave Our Musical Islands
Two critics discuss the state of classical, jazz, and pop.
Ben Ratliff
posted Nov. 7, 2007 - Debating The Year of Living Biblically
Exercising the God muscle.
A.J. Jacobs
posted Oct. 18, 2007 - Debating God's Harvard
A Patrick Henry College grad weighs in.
David Kuo
posted Sept. 20, 2007 - Search for more dialogues articles
- Subscribe to the dialogues RSS feed
- View our complete dialogues archive
The Environment and Economics
to: Steven E. LandsburgPosted Thursday, April 8, 1999, at 3:30 AM ET
Well, I sure don't want you as my investment adviser. Here I, as an American citizen, own the national-park system. It is, I think you will agree, truly irreplaceable and unique--I can't go out and buy a replacement. Its value to me is recreational, spiritual, scientific. It's not very likely to enhance the GNP very much if sold. And there are no likely buyers out there who would pay its replacement value. Future generations, and other critters dependent on its wonders, don't have the practical ability to enter the marketplace. Putting it on the market would definitely flood the marketplace for this kind of land. My share of any proceeds would be divided among 300 million Americans, whereas I can enjoy far more than one-three-hundred-millionth of its value to me by owning it jointly.
And you think we should sell it?
On the other questions, there is plenty of precedent for declining living standards for most people during a period of increasing per capita income measured as a mean. India, for example, from 1700 to 1950. Or Britain during the early Industrial Revolution.
But I have a counterproposal for your national-park idea. Let's privatize the atmosphere--give each American ownership of the air that passes into his or her lungs. Let's require every factory and power plant in the country to obtain permission from every affected owner before emitting pollutants ... otherwise it's common-law trespass time. Then we can look at the marginal price of pollution rights, and see how much our current market undervalues natural resources.
Of course, some curmudgeonly parents might refuse to sell the rights to put ozone into their kids' lungs at any price, which could be awkward for industrial polluters. But hey, don't we need to protect private-property rights in this country? Where does Con Ed get the right to put tiny particles containing mercury into my lungs, even if they aren't sure it's hurting me?
to: Steven E. LandsburgPosted Thursday, April 8, 1999, at 3:30 AM ET
feedback | about us | help | advertise | newsletters | mobile
User Agreement and Privacy Policy | All rights reserved
- Today's Headlines
- Smiling Now Primarily Used To Communicate Anger
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:00:00 -0400 - Mugabe Heckled By Parliament
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:00:24 -0400 - [audio] Area Man Always Picked Last For Employment
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:00:44 -0400 - » More from the Onion
Assessing Sarah PalinTopic A | Political experts weigh in on McCain's running mate.
Meyerson: Pure Identity PoliticsCapehart: A Hail Mary Pass
- Robinson: So Many Miles From Selma
- Dionne: Obama Rekindles the Flame | Editorial
- Krauthammer: Obama Is the Perfect Stranger
- Milbank: Obama's Big Fat Greek Setting
- Today's Headlines
- Don Cheadle Dishes on Brad, George and 'Traitor'
Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:44:39 GMT - Fineman: Obama Nomination Makes History
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:01:06 GMT - U.S. Video Blogger Recounts His Beijing Arrest
Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:35:52 GMT - » More from Newsweek
- Today's Headlines
- The Nominee
Fri, 29 August 2008 6:06:13 GMT - Katrina, the Ultimate Party Crasher
Thu, 28 August 2008 17:08:55 GMT - The Big 5-0
Wed, 27 August 2008 14:30:36 GMT - » More from The Root

dialogues









