The Hammond Report

«Sustainable» is just another bogus liberal term like «affordable.»

However, Mr. Boudreaux is generally correct in his somewhat simplistic characterization of the Middle Ages. But I would not go so far as to say the people of that time practiced «sustainability» or «localization.» Such ridiculous post-modern expressions do not apply simply because the people of the Middle Ages had no choice in the manner in which they were forced to live. Their world was scrounged together from the leftover scraps of the Roman Empire.

Medieval «sustainability» and «localization» essentially prepared the way for Europe to become a vast graveyard. It is true that starvation and malnutrition were rampant because of soil depletion and crop failures, and very often one village that had a surplus of food could not sell the food to another village that needed it because there was no transportation system worthy of the name. There were no central granaries under medieval «localization,» either. But the main reason why so many people were condemned to be walking dead was that wages had hit an all time low. People simply had no money because there were too many people competing for work.

The Black Death very quickly remedied the situation by wiping out one-third of the enfeebled population. In the 50 years following the plague, from 1350 to 1400, wages rose spectacularly. Even the soil and the plant life were rejuvenated. In France, for example, nearly every tree had been cut down for shelter or fuel by «local entrepreneurs» prior to the onset of the plague. But by the early 1400s, France was once again covered by verdant forests.

«Sustainability» and «localization,» if we take the terms at face value, have no place in a modern world. The answer to increasing the health and prosperity of a planet filled with billions is in the aggressive exploitation of natural resources by the most efficient technology. That and international trade.

So the only choices are Wal-Mart and starvation? Don't think so.

He means that you have a real tendency to exclude the middle. I have schooled you on this before, and it looks like I will have to again. Study the list this time, because it makes you look silly when smart people like David come around.

«Excluded Middle (False Dichotomy, Faulty Dilemma, Bifurcation):

assuming there are only two alternatives when in fact there are more. For example, assuming Atheism is the only alternative to Fundamentalism, or being a traitor is the only alternative to being a loud patriot. »

Geesh. I'll take the meat of the argument up elsewhere.

The funny part of your thickness is that you don't seem to get the irony here. You 'trust' Don Boudreaux, PhD and Chairman of George Mason University Department of Economics, yet you refuse to listen to people of credentials on global warming.

Since you're so big on logical fallacies, Shane, you might want to look into «appeal to authority.»

Why does this have to be such a big issue? There really is such a simple asnwer and i believe he who can not find this nswer much look from a different point of view. . .

who really fucking cares about this shit
i know i dont