Subnostr

I have been thinking about this a lot lately. I agree that your example isn't realistic, but in the case of fishing and hunting it can be an issue.

The tragedy of the commons issue also includes externalities like companies dumping waste in the ocean to save money.

I am not sure what solutions exist for that without regulation.

Hayek said as much in The Road to Surfdom... Mises called him a socialist for comments like that.

I'm still working to fully understand the issue.

Highsselhoff 2y ago

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Still working as well :)

In case of fishing or hunting: at some point of market saturation it will make more sense to specialise in something else you can trade for food, than to overfish the waters and overhunt the grounds.

And in case of dumping waste to cut corners: this only makes sense in a high time preference environment of fiat money.

There is little incentive to poison the well of your customers if you have lower time preference and consider the longterm future of your business.

Which you can only do on a hard money standard, that a free market always selects on its own.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Sourcenode 2y ago

I fully agree that time preference plays a major role in pollution. Single use plastic items littering the oceans and streams. As you said, companies cutting corners everywhere.

I think another issue might be the legal enforcement that companies NEED to maximize shareholder value at all times. That might be an overlooked benefit to a free market.

In the case of hunting though I could imagine if everyone with a rifle decided they wanted venison one year we might accidentally wipe out the deer population in a single season.

The disturbances in the market caused by fiat are the cause of all kinds of shortages. They might also be the cause of animal depopulation. That might be worth looking in to. For example, in the US the government paid people to kill buffalo. Possibly to starve out the natives, but also likely to make sure the population needed assistance.

So much history to unpack 😮‍💨

Highsselhoff 2y ago

Indeed.

In short, I think humans naturally tend to cooperation, specialisation and trade.

So even people wanting more venison will figure out the opportunity costs of joining an already crowded venison market, and realise a better use of their limited time on earth is to produce spears and arrow heads to trade with the venison hunters (for example)

These type of oversimplified theories all take as a base assumption that people are inherently selfish and bad. So the anointed must step in to save us.

Which says more about the narcissistic outlook of your typical academic than about reality.

But like you said, so much history to unpack 💨

Sourcenode 2y ago

I imagine many books will be written about the environmental impact of Bitcoin (from the positive point of view)

But not by me. I have other things to work on 🙂