“Glenn took the time – time he could’ve chose to spend out on the golf course – to put together papers which served as tutorials to help all of us understand the complex terminologies and issues we would have to become familiar with if we were to be successful at deterring the industrialization of our respective regions via the industrial wind scam.”
– Mary Kay Barton (below)
“Glenn Schleede remains, along with Tom Tanton, a mentor first among equals. And he’s the most decent man I know.”
– Jon Boone (below)
“In the most trying debates, Glenn had an uncanny ability to focus on the big picture yet explain nuances to the novice and expert alike. He always shared his knowledge with compassion and passion. ”
– Tom Tanton (below)
Glenn R. …
Editor note: This responds to Professor Dolan’s post yesterday, “Hayek and a Carbon Tax: Response to Bradley, which answered Bradley’s post two days ago, “Hayek was not a Malthusian or Global Tariff Advocate (link to a carbon tax peculiar, errant).” The debate began with Dolan’s original piece, “Friedrich Hayek on Carbon Taxes.”
———————–
…“… let’s add the ‘fat tail’ of the global CO2 blanket protecting against a little ice age or an ice age in the next several hundred years. Why not think of global lukewarming as a short-term positive, and the CO2 blanket as a long-term positive?”
“Classical liberals should be focused on adaptation to climate change, natural or anthropogenic, which is wealth-as-health and free movements of goods and services and people.
“Professor Dolan is invited to study the Hayek literature to see if any of the above nine points are not valid. The burden of proof is on him to try to square a classical liberal with disputed externality pricing, ‘tax-bads’ public finance, international tariffs, equity tax-dividend adjustments, and government planning.”
Yale economics PhD Ed Dolan recently attempted to link the classical liberal scholar F. A. Hayek (1899–1992) to a carbon tax in a piece published by the (misnamed) Niskanen Center. [1]
“Friedrich Hayek on Carbon Taxes” is more than unconvincing. It is shoddy. It fails to make its point and (purposefully?) neglects the obvious themes of Hayekian economics and political economy for a generic issue such as climate change.
Professor Dolan begins by admitting that Hayek never wrote anything on the subject.…