You may know that I've already written once about one of Prince Ea's "songs" (if that's what they are called) because it was so wrong, but I must do this again because another is spreading, and it simply does not stand up to economic scrutiny.
I'll let you take a look before I bite in.
Dear future generations, I'm sorry - sorry we left you with people who think they know everything without probably even haven taken a course on the subject. Sorry these people think just because an idea makes sense in their head, that it must be a fact.
I'm sorry that you have to listen to this man who knows nothing about economics. I'm sorry he doesn't understand the history of economies to know that though the worldwide tree population may be down, the United States's tree population has been growing. In fact, the tree population in America is higher than it was 100 years ago because with the wealth we accumulated, we were able to change our preferences of demand for more scenery and more landscape. And I'm sorry that he doesn't understand that as continents like Asia and Africa and South America catch up in the future decades, their preferences too will change.
I'm sorry he also doesn't understand the basic foundations of supply and demand. We will not run out of trees. Trees will be here, more likely to outlive the human race than become extinct among us. That is because of supply and demand. If what he is saying is true - that our demand for a product would run it into extinction - then explain after all these years how cows and chickens, in such high demand, are in no danger of extinction. When consumers demand a product, there is an incentive for producers to continue producing that product. I'm sorry he doesn't understand that trees aren't being destroyed for money, but are actually being saved as a species because of it.
I'm also sorry he doesn't understand technological changes. I'm sorry he doesn't take into account the digital revolution that has taken over much of the world and will continue into the future, which I am sure are excluded from his calculation. That is, if he performed any calculations at all before opening his mouth. I doubt it.
I'm sorry this man doesn't understand how the dollar has helped improved people's lives. Profit is not put above people. Profits are due to the demand of the people. Therefore, collecting a profit is, by design of the system, providing people with the goods and services they need and desire, and therefore the dollar is not destroying humanity, but improving it in so many more ways than groups of individuals and activists like him ever could.
I'm sorry this man thinks we will seriously "poison the oceans so much you can't even swim in them." I'm sorry he doesn't understand the sheer value of the beach and beach front property not only in the US, but across the globe. Additionally, someone may need to inform him of how vast the oceans are. 71% of all the Earth is covered in water.
I'm sorry this man doesn't see how this isn't destruction, but is progress. The progress of human development that has made our lives so better off than they ever were. Because if we seriously were to emulate the Native Americans, such as he did, and live like them, we would be underweight, large groups of the population would die off each winter or any time we came in contact with another tribe that had some disease we hadn't been exposed to, and live to an average life expectancy of about 40, if lucky. I think we can call our history progress, not destruction.
I'm sorry this man has it so wrong on "climate change." Attack Fox News, the gloves are coming off now mister. First off, though this is clearly not a scientific piece of work, you cannot equate faulty climate models as a causality for 5 million people who settled on land less than 10 meters above sea level that has always been prone to flooding during March to September when their snow melts, the rain starts pouring, and it becomes monsoon season. There is no causal link because there have always been problems in Bangladesh. Additionally, 95% of the global warming models from the 90's were proven wrong in 2014. Additionally, Al Gore - you know the man who invented the Internet - predicted there would be no ice caps in 2014 for us to find that the ice caps had reached their all time highest ice covering in 2014 since 2006. Moreover still, NASA declared 2014 was the warmest year on record, but it was discovered they used equipment highly prone to a larger margin or error because all the other measurements couldn't prove that fact. Therefore, NASA was only 38% sure of something they deemed fact. Just what I want my doctor to tell me - "I'm 38% sure you don't have cancer." Um, you don't sound too confident doc.
We conservatives and Fox News viewers do not dismiss the idea of climate change. However, we have serious doubts over the theories when the climate models do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Especially when there are extremely perverse incentives that drive climate scientist to scare the general public in order to receive government funding for their projects and live the high life on the American taxpayers' dimes when the funding could be going to better uses, such as finding cures to cancers or heart disease or paying down our own national debt.
Additionally, I'm sorry he also doesn't understand the economic concept of a discount rate, and that when taking this discount rate into effect, the foreseeable economic costs of global warming (assuming these faulty models are correct) will not even begin to have real effects until 400 year for now. Applying the discount rate to these cost, the externality we create today reduces to $0 in today's dollars. Therefore, there is no externality today of our actions.
Furthermore, I do not even want to get into the complications of actually reducing CO2 emissions and the economic complications and game theory applications that arise because he probably doesn't even understand up to this point, and the complications of reducing CO2 emissions is quite a complex problem that I don't even think I fully comprehend it yet.
However, in doing what he is advocating for, I must apologize to the future generations. I must apologize that if we follow his methodology, you will not have as good of lives as you can have. If we follow his ideas, we'd cut production, reduce investments, and thus slow economic growth. We'd smother technological innovation, and therefore not provide you with the better lives you could and deserve to have.
I'm also sorry that this man took a cheap shot at Sarah Palin because he was running out of things to say. First of all, Sarah Palin said she loved the smell of the emissions because she was at riding in a parade of motor cycles from the Pentagon the the Vietnam War Memorial, and who doesn't love the smell of gasoline? However, to answer his unrelated point, it is good that children in China wear face masks walking to school. At least they have face masks to wear, unlike American children during the Industrial Revolution. I'm sorry he doesn't understand the history of how economies have developed into first world nations, and as I've previously addressed, how people's preferences change once they have acquired wealth.
I'm also sorry that he equates ISIS to melting ice, which we have established is not actually melting but grew in size recently. ISIS has plundered the Middle East, savagely killing men, women, and children, Christians, Muslims, and religious minorities. The total deaths from melting ice don't even pale in comparison to ISIS. Want to know what the biggest killer of all humanity has probably been? Cold weather. Yes, freezing water. Either cold weather, or it takes a close second place behind communism.
I am sorry this generation has so little education in economics. As a professor of mine once said, economics is the only subject where people never study it, but think they are experts on it. I am not sorry for saying you are wrong, because when there is a false statement, it is up to the economic students of the world to correct it. Do not let the bold ignorant destroy our well-being because they can shout the loudest. When they shout, respond louder with facts. No matter what you're fighting for, it won't matter if we're all equally poor.
Sorry. No, I'm not really sorry.