- Shari Vandermolen at Acoustic Blend Cafe - February 15, 2020, at Melrose United Church, 86 Homewood Ave.
- 5 Upcoming Events...
Recent Articles
- City Proposal to Restart Ant-Racism Centre Ignores Racialized Voicesby Anthony Marco, published December 09, 2019 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- There's No Place Like Home: The Possibility Of Theatreby Kevin Somers, published December 06, 2019 in Entertainment and Sports
(0 comments)
- Hamilton Hit With Freezing Rainby Isabella Lopes, published December 02, 2019 in Local News
(0 comments)
- Hamilton's Secret Council and the Financial Penalties for Speaking Outby Cameron Kroetsch, published November 24, 2019 in Commentary
(2 comments)
- The Environmental Urbanist Podcastby Jason Allen, published November 21, 2019 in Hardy to Zone 6
(0 comments)
- A Recipe For Mass Murderby Kevin Somers, published November 21, 2019 in Opinion
(0 comments)
- City of Burlington Shares Options for Official Plan Reviewby Roland Tanner, published October 29, 2019 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Carbon Pricing a Small-Government Solution to Climate Changeby Lauren Stephen, published October 28, 2019 in Special Report: Climate Change
(6 comments)
- Alberta's Oil Tantrum Masks a Desperate Cry for Helpby Ryan McGreal, published October 24, 2019 in Special Report: Climate Change
(7 comments)
- AGH Film Festival Review: There Are No Fakesby Doreen Nicoll, published October 24, 2019 in Reviews
(0 comments)
- AGH Film Festival Review: Toni Morrison: The Pieces I Amby Doreen Nicoll, published October 24, 2019 in Reviews
(0 comments)
- AGH Film Festival Review: Pain and Gloryby Doreen Nicoll, published October 24, 2019 in Reviews
(0 comments)
- The Staggering Mediocrity of Andrew Scheerby Ryan McGreal, published October 18, 2019 in Federal Election 2019
(8 comments)
- Hamilton is Joining the Extinction Rebellionby Nicole Smith, published October 16, 2019 in Special Report: Climate Change
(6 comments)
- Time for a National Basic Incomeby Doreen Nicoll, published October 16, 2019 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Art Gallery of Hamilton Film Festivalby Doreen Nicoll, published October 16, 2019 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Remembering the Legacy of Hate as Council Considers Partnering With a Homophobic Political Action Committeeby Shawn Selway, published September 25, 2019 in Commentary
(2 comments)
- Book Review: My Year of Living Spiritually by Anne Bokmaby Doreen Nicoll, published September 25, 2019 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Kanesatake Crisis Still Unresolved 29 Years Laterby Doreen Nicoll, published September 25, 2019 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- No Easy Resolution to Burlington's Naturalized Garden Controversyby Doreen Nicoll, published September 10, 2019 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By j.servus (registered) | Posted November 11, 2013 at 23:32:54
Thanks for the excellent article. You are eloquent about the most important point: no price can be assigned to a clean conscience, fidelity to intelligence, to reason, to responsibility.
Your article also brings to light the underlying reason why it was a tragic mistake for the US Supreme Court to rule that corporations are 'persons' for the purpose of campaign contributions. Real persons have many different concerns and interests; corporations only have one: creating value for shareholders. (At least, this is the way business is currently taught.)
Without wishing to detract at all from the importance of the issues you raise, I would suggest a nuance at one point. I don't think 'arbitrary' is the right word for the values assigned by markets, inasmuch as 'arbitrary' connotes 'irrational', as in just picking a number at random. Prices do reflect some (inadequate) rational valuation. However, as you point out, the prices assigned do not reflect all the real costs, because (among other reasons) they do not (adequately) take into consideration externalities. Prices count costs, but not all the real costs. A regulatory framework like, for instance, a carbon trading scheme, is an attempt to assign a price to negative externalities that otherwise are not adequately accounted for simply by correlating supply and demand. In other words, this kind of regulation assigns an economic cost for what has a real cost. It is not clear to me how else these costs could be properly accounted for, since an individual vendor or consumer is not in a good position to understand, evaluate, and responsibly assign a dollar value to something like "air quality for everyone," in relation to some prospective purchase. (Of course there are always some who will by "carbon offsets," but the exceptions prove the rule: the externalities aren't accounted for in the price, and we know it.)
All of that said, I would not want to be misunderstood. My first point is that prices are a rational valuation system. My second point is (as you eloquently explain) that there are real costs that are not adequately accounted for in that system. My third and most important point is also your main point, as I take it: There are values to which no economic cost can possibly be assigned, and among them are the most important values in the world. As I tell my children, how much money is a clean conscience worth?
Comment edited by j.servus on 2013-11-11 23:38:58
Permalink | Context