Ep. 89 Risking the Planet?

3 June 2017     |     Tom Woods     |     21

Krugman says Donald Trump is all wrong to want to give regulatory relief to the coal industry. That industry can’t ever be revived to where it was in the old days, says Krugman, and it would be silly to try, especially when all these abundant clean alternatives are available. In fact, to try would amount to putting “the whole planet’s future at risk.”

(Krugman also makes a side remark about Trump’s blasphemy on NATO, and we also comment on that.)

Krugman Column

Trump’s Energy, Low and Dirty” (May 29, 2017)

Contra Column

Krugman Ignores IPCC on Climate Economics,” by Bob Murphy

Free eBook Mentioned

Your Facebook Friends Are Wrong About Health Care

Join Us Aboard the Contra Cruise!

Bob and Tom are hosting the second annual Contra Cruise for fans of Contra Krugman! October 15-22 aboard Royal Caribbean’s Oasis of the Seas, and departing from Port Canaveral. It’s an absolute blast, as you’ll see in the video. Check it out by clicking here.

Need More Episodes?

Tom and Bob have their own podcasts! Check out the Tom Woods Show and the Lara-Murphy Report.

Share this post:Digg thisShare on FacebookGoogle+Share on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter
  • Bro Methylene

    During the so-called “Cold War” the Left was almost unanimously pro-Soviet! The “anti-communist” was a figure of fun. It was impossible for a “liberal” to heap too much contempt and ridicule on such a pathetic type, who was analogous to the “climate denier” of the present day. Now that the vast majority of Russians have rejected communism, we’re supposed to hate and fear Russia! If you lived through those years, this paradox is nauseating. It is impossible to take the “mainstream media” seriously.

  • Bro Methylene

    In the 90’s, the Hipsters condescendingly informed me that the planet was at risk due to the hole in the ozone layer and the loss of the Amazon Rain Forest (“the lungs of the planet.”) But I guess Al Gore fixed those problems.

  • https://www.facebook.com/david.rogers.hunt David_Rogers_Hunt

    To those who want to see more of the science of Climate Change, I would strongly suggest How Global Warming Saved The Planet | Patrick Moore and Stefan Molyneux (53:18).

    • davegrille

      At least some farms will produce more crops using less water with the increase in CO2 and temperature .

  • http://chorusbreviarii.blogspot.com bedwere

    Cato the Elder would agree with the Donald. He wrote that:

    Human life is almost like a sword. If you exercise it, it is consumed; if you don’t exercise, however rust destroys it. In the same way, we see men
    that are consumed by exercise; if you never exercise, lazyness and sluggishness make more damage than exercise.

    gel. n.a. 9.2.6 sqq.
    Nam uita humana prope uti ferrum est. si exerceas, con- 3.1
    teritur; si non exerceas, tamen rubigo interficit. item homines
    exercendo uidemus conteri; si nihil exerceas, inertia atque tor-
    pedo plus detrimenti facit quam exercitio.

  • Winston Ewert

    I have a serious question:

    Why isn’t this show called kontra krugman?

  • http://www.economicmanblog.com Roger Barris

    Here is a great interview with Bjorn Lomborg from the Copenhagen Consensus on climate change. This guy is great because he is always coolly and calmly rationale. He also doesn’t deny that human activity is affecting climate, but he points out that the impacts are small/manageable and that we — and especially the world’s poor for whom the climate activists claim to be speaking — have much more urgent.
    It is a 20-minute podcast and well worth the time.

    • Kevin Burciaga

      It’s all about allocation of resources. We have a limited amount of resources (i.e.- money) but an infinite number of needs and wants. Even if we could limit climate change (and there’s evidence that we can’t), we would have to neglect everything else (education, R&D, new businesses, agriculture, infrastructure, etc.)

  • http://www.economicmanblog.com Roger Barris

    Bob Murphy does a great job on these podcasts, but still I have a bone to pick: Why does Bob always feel the need to try to explain away the apparent idiocy of Trump’s quotes? I recognize that he is not endorsing Trump, but isn’t it about time to apply Occam’s Razor and conclude that, the reason why Trump so often sounds like an ignorant, senile imbecile is because he is an ignorant, senile imbecile?

    • Kevin Burciaga

      I think Bob is trying to be as non-partisan as possible. Although he doesn’t support Trump (neither do I), he does give credit to Trump when he deserves it.

      • http://www.economicmanblog.com Roger Barris

        I hear you and I know that Bob does not support Trump. But it is not “non-partisan” to constantly attempt to construe Trump’s plain words in a way that doesn’t make him look like the idiot that he obviously is. Here is one of his latest jewels (of which there are many on a daily basis):

        “President Donald Trump floated putting solar panels on his planned Mexican border wall in a meeting with legislative leaders Tuesday afternoon, according to White House and Capitol Hill officials.

        It was unclear why Trump brought up the topic, but he presented the panels as a way to fund the wall, which is expected to cost billions of dollars, according to three people familiar with the conversation.”

        The guy is just an idiot, almost certainly senile and probably mentally ill. Let’s not pretend otherwise. It is important to know what we are dealing with and also important to make it clear to the Krugmans of the world that not everyone who disagrees with Krugman is an idiot. In addition to trying to claiming the moral high ground, leftists like Krugman always try to claim the intellectual high ground, also. By being “non-partisan” about someone like Trump, we only help them.

        • Deplorable Ling Silberbaum

          Actually, putting solar panels on the wall is the perfect way to get Democrats on board. The Global Warming, er I mean Climate Chaos, Hoax is an article of religious faith for the Resistance. If you put solar panels on a Hummer and painted it green, Democrats would like it.

          The people who look idiotic are the Trump Haters, who have been throwing the Great Mother of All Temper Tantrums since November 9th.

        • Bro Methylene

          When I saw the “artist’s rendering” of the proposed solar-energy-collecting wall, I thought, “This is an act of political genius.” Trump has done many stupid things: the missile attack on a Syrian air base, the visit to Saudi Arabia, the allocating of taxpayers’ money to ridiculous “feminist” legislation – but proposing the “solar wall” is not one of them. In fact, this idea is so inspired, I can’t believe its his.

          If you need to be outraged by senile idiocy, you can always follow the antics of McCain, Hillary, and Nancy.

    • anarcholibertine

      Do you really think Trump is a “senile imbecile”?

      The guy has been wildly successful in business & as a total newcomer pulled off possibly the greatest political upset in U.S. history (while having the entire deck stacked against him) to become the FIRST non-politician/non-ex-military President in our HISTORY…and he has, thus far, fended off the most outrageous, unfair, intense, & co-ordinated attacks on a new President I’ve ever seen…I’m sorry, but I don’t think an imbecile would’ve accomplished any of this.

      My guess is that there is a method to Trump’s madness…and, remember, the American public isn’t exactly informed or politically savvy, or even very bright…its not like well-thought-out & fact-based statements go over very well w/them.

      Bob (as I find myself doing) probably defends Trump because he sees how unfairly he’s being treated by the Establishment & large % of the public…these same folks have completely ignored and/or excused the HORRENDOUS criminal & immoral acts of the last several Presidents…the hypocrisy & misplaced moral outrage we’re seeing directed at Trump are appalling.

  • TomMullen

    To Tom’s “will there ever come a time” questions around the 30 minute mark, I offer the real reason the answer is “no.” It’s because no one who buys the progressive climate theory has been “bullied” into believing it. Those who believe it do so because they want to believe it. It rationalizes their political and economic policies as the only solution that can save the planet. No amount of logic is going to convince them they’re mistaken because deep down they don’t really care. It’s a political movement, not a scientific one.

  • davegrille

    Krugman’s support of NATO is silly .

  • davegrille

    The portion of the population who believe in climate hysterics is shrinking.

  • anarcholibertine

    I win again!

    • sunny_dayze

      You do! Dunce of the Year! You do the title justice. Good for you.

      • anarcholibertine

        You admitted it–I WON!

      • Artor

        I want to film myself moving my bowels all over your flat chest. So hot.