Ridley on Future and AGW
Ridley poses a optimistic view on AGW and the crisis in the future which is likely not to occur. If the wealth of the world grows this much it does pose a threat to some in the form of eliminating any support for that political advocacy predicting disaster in the environment, in wealth distribution, and so on. Progressivism cannot exist in the future with the scenarios that Ridley outlines in this video.
Also given that IPCC is pushing the likelihood of RCP8.5, the assumptions as Ridley points out are pretty absurd.
We should revisit occasionally what the proper role of government is. As the constitution was a good sense of direction, we need a core set of principles to add in order to deal with the future.
So many want to engineer society, remove risk, assist certain groups, rather than let individuals thrive and raise communities. Why?
Is Democracy where we all "get it good and hard" or is it the best means to a free society?
Should we roll with the special interests, or make the government achieve its proper role, what is that role, and how to do this?
When do deficits and governments become too large?
Government is becoming more elitist while trying to sell corrections to problems it created, what makes this possible?
This could also be inserted into the field above, or erased
Currently as a society, we are having a most difficult time discussing political issues. What is driving this? And why a rebirth in political culture would be a good thing.
Are "markets" dead as some would conjecture? Or is free enterprise what got us here?
At the heart of economics there are several possible economic schools of thought, the essence of these schools of thought and how they relate to our lives.
