On climate, another libertarian bravely fights to keep Mises' light under a bushel
I just left the following closing comment on Jim Fedako‘s December 30 Mises Economics Blog post, “What?!? No one mentioned the cult or kooky parts“:
January 25, 2011 at 12:37 pm Tom
P.S. I note that my other remarks on the thread are here:
Categories: Uncategorized
You’re done here, Jim? Hardly, as you never even started — in the sense of honest engagement.
Once more, as you flee from engagement, you fail to address ANYTHING I’ve actually said, while continuing your penchant for attacking strawmen of your own making. I “continue to advocate for government interventions”, you say? Oh? Anywhere on this thread? I did offer you the following link to my thinking, but if you had troubled yourself to look, you’d see it’s a libertarian proposal for de-regulation: http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/archive/2010/02/10/towards-a-productive-libertarian-approach-on-climate-energy-and-environmental-issues.aspx.
You might not like to hear it, but the apparent lack of sincerity in your engagement IS shameful — even if one of a piece of many other libertarian/Misesean thinkers here who forget their thinking caps in favor of falling into partisanship and cognitive traps:
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/search.aspx?q=watermelon
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/archive/2009/11/02/the-road-not-taken-iv-my-other-hysterical-comments-on-climate-science-amp-how-austrians-hamstring-themselves.aspx
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/archive/2010/02/13/bill-gates-roger-pielke-avatar-amp-the-climate-of-distrust-or-can-we-move-from-a-tribal-questioning-of-motives-to-win-win-policies.aspx
My reference to ‘libertarians’ was to this pantheon, who quite obviously have not really troubled themselves at LvMI pages to engage on climate or natural issues, other than in the most pathetic and shallow way.
A good recipe for libertarian irrelevancy, as I keep pointing out. Am I wrong to hope for better?
Sincerely,