cite as: F. Bi. 2008. Are mainstream economists and their dogs part of the Great Worldwide Global Warmist Conspiracy too? Intl. J. Inact., 1:3—4
Tim Worstall of the Adam Smith Institute, in his infinite wisdom, decides to argue on The Register that creating jobs is a bad thing:
What would those people be doing if they weren’t doing these newly created [green] jobs? Something else, certainly, we’ve not just sown dragon’s teeth to create these new workers now, have we? And what was it that they were doing previously? … we lose whatever else it was that they were doing at the same time as we gain our bright shiny new energy. They might have been wiping babies’ bottoms, stacking shelves at Albertson’s or working to cure cancer.
Yeah, or they might have been involved in maintaining those CO2-emitting coal power plants which won’t be that needed in the first place when the green jobs come along. Or, they might have been curing cancer, while those who end up curing cancer might have been building and maintaining coal plants. Or, they could have been jobless in the first place anyway. And so on. Funny how Worstall totally fails to consider these possibilities.
There’s something of a willy waving contest going on here, and clearly Al is the Big Swinging Dick because he’s offering millions of jobs, not just a million, or mere hundreds of thousands like that piker Porritt.
Which leads us to the question: how many jobs have inactivist think-tanks such as Adam Smith Institute created? Given their professed profound knowledge of the free market and value creation, you’d think they’re quite good as this sort of thing.
Never mind, because Worstall hastens to tell us that it’s not the number of new jobs that matters:
… what we actually want is someone to come up with a plan that doesn’t create new jobs, one that doesn’t cause us losses elsewhere.
In a way that’s true: it’ll be quite troublesome for Worstall if he loses his lucrative ‘job’ as a professional writer of garbage. Can’t let that happen.
And the nicest thing is that, as I’ve said before, mainstream economists aren’t exactly buying into Worstall’s argument, or any of the other prognostications of “the green economy is doomed!” from the inactivist think-tank-o-sphere. (So does that mean mainstream economists and their dogs are part of the Great Warmist Conspiracy too?)