You may have noticed that my posting has been spotty this week. A well-intentioned friend of the blog hearing of my predicament ghosted a post to fill the void. I’m assured it’s brilliant. Here it is:
No time today, but I want to ask my readers to consider interesting implications of two articles appearing in popular sources today: one on business leaders’ conviction that more government money needs to be devoted to removing the uncertainty posed by climate change, another on the displacements caused by monopsony.
Is it so brilliant I should have passed it off as my own? Discuss.
3 responses so far ↓
1 SoSoGreen! // Jul 24, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Old hat, I’d say.
Just because governments are spending big time on jet fuel and bureacracy and Western government funding — and are giving incentives to environmental projects such as discussed several days ago at this web address (a rare case in which an IPO was denied based on pro-environmental lying) — there isn’t necessarily a bubble forming that hurts consumers yet.
2 Environmental MediaWatch // Jul 24, 2009 at 6:21 pm
No!
3 Cate // Jul 27, 2009 at 10:51 am
According to SourceWatch, “The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a global warming skeptics group which appears to primarily be the work of Robert Ferguson, its President.” http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute
Leave a Comment