Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

What's To Be Done With Air Pollution?

Rate this topic


Ayn Rand Lives

Recommended Posts

How would an objectivist handle the problem of air pollution? I understand pollution with regard to property rights, but something that is held in common to all is a different matter.

I think that it would be acceptable to hold businesses accountable for the pollution they emit by offering financial incentives. For example, a company would be fined a certain amount of money each year based on how much CO2, or some other noxious gas, is released from their smokestacks. This would seem to create an incentive for using cleaner energy resources or developing better energy methods.

Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has come up a few times before; if you do a search on the site you will find a few discussions.

Basically my understanding is that you have to look at the air as just a transmission medium, not a "common resource" (ie something that nobody has property rights over). The real issue is the pollutant being released by X and harming Y. At a certain level the harm caused by the pollution would be considered a rights violation and could be dealt with using legislation or a lawsuit.

I don't buy the incentive method. How does it help the people hurt by the pollution for the government to collect fines from the polluters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy the incentive method. How does it help the people hurt by the pollution for the government to collect fines from the polluters?

In fact, it doesn't even require that there be harm. The underlying assumption is that "air pollution", whatever that is, automatically harms all people on the planet, whether or not any harm was actually done. It violates a basic assumption of our legal system, namely that guilt must be proven and not assumed automatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would an objectivist handle the problem of air pollution?  I understand pollution with regard to property rights, but something that is held in common to all is a different matter. 

Any thoughts?

I agree with the responses posted by Godless Capitalist and Professor Odden. The problem with current pollution law is that it is based on the collectivist assumption that the victim of pollution is society at large and not a specific individual. Unfortunately, even many free market economists accept this premise and endorse making law the creature of "social efficiency" rather than justice.

The single best treatment of the subject is "Law, Property Rights and Air Pollution" by Murray N. Rothbard at

http://64.233.179.104/u/Mises?q=cache:bHjO...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...