Si creemos que tenemos un derecho colectivo a definir los límites a los impactos humanos en el medio ambiente, entonces un sistema político verdaderamente democrático daría mecanismos mediante los cuales las opiniones (información) de los ciudadanos sobre los niveles aceptables de contaminación, tasas de teniendo o el agotamiento de los recursos, el alcance de la pavimento o monocultivo, etc, puede ser transmitida a las industrias cuyos acciones producen estos tipos de efectos en el mundo. Y si creemos que todos comparten la riqueza de recursos naturales como un bien común, como un derecho humano, (tenemos un derecho compartido de usar el aire y el agua y otros recursos, y evitar que otros de ensuciar los), entonces la gente - cada persona - debería recibir un pago monetario equivalente a su cuota del valor de los recursos naturales tomadas por los intereses corporativos con el fin de obtener ganancias económicas.
If we believe that we have a collective right to define limits to human's impact on the environment, then a truly democratic political system would provide mechanisms whereby opinions (information) from citizens about acceptable levels of pollution, rates of taking or depletion of resources, extent of paving or monoculture, etc., could be conveyed to the economic actors whose actions produce these kinds of effects. And if we believe that we all share ownership of natural resource wealth as a commons, (we have a shared right to use the air and water and other such resources, and stop others from messing them up), then the people--each person--ought to receive a monetary payment equal to their share of the value of natural resources taken by corporate interests for the purpose of economic gain.
In an economic system, information is carried and value is represented by money. If the signal that the people want to send to industry is that they value clean air and water so much that they feel it is necessary that industries try harder to avoid fouling the air and water, then the most efficient and fair way of communicating this information is to charge a fee on those actions that are causing the detrimental impact that the people feel should be more strictly limited. A free market auction of natural resource user-permits would cause those resources that the people wish to conserve to cost more, to cost what society collectively decides they must cost to cause industry to put the necessary amount of effort into conservation and pollution prevention.
Expressions of opinion by the people, (through a random sample survey, for example), about what are the most appropriate limits on human transformation of the Earth would directly affect the actions that humans perform that impact the Earth and that affect the human community. Similarly, signals from neurons in biological brains affect the behavior of other neurons, and they affect conditions in the larger organism. A system of fees on those activities that the people feel are harmful or should be limited would function as an autonomic nervous system for Earth by helping to maintain a healthy ecological balance. We become not a cancer on the Earth (growing and consuming resources beyond what is healthy for the larger system), but brain cells for the planet, (helping to maintain a balance among the various activities and processes within the human economy and the larger ecological systems).
John Champagne
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)