[logicchains]

It's interesting to see the statement that a problem like this can 'probably only be solved by governments' when governments so far have completely failed to solve it, and the proposed non-government solutions (such as removing the limitations on the liability of polluters, and allowing those whose health or livelihood has been injured by pollution to sue, potentially by class action) have never even been attempted. "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and inspecting a different result." After a few large polluters went bankrupt after multi-billion dollar payouts to fishermen, beachgoers and such, I imagine industry as a whole would be more wary about pollution. Without limited liability - limited by government, I should add - BP would almost certainly be bankrupt by now. As would whichever company owned the nuclear plant that leaked in Japan.

[rquantz]

the proposed non-government solutions (such as removing the limitations on the liability of polluters, and allowing those whose health or livelihood has been injured by pollution to sue, potentially by class action) have never even been attempted.

The mistake you're making here is to think that this is a non-governmental solution. Yes, it is law that is preventing this solution from being enacted, but it is in the context of government that it could happen at all: government runs the courts and forces the loser of a suit to pay the winner.

Your argument is akin to the people who shout "keep your government hands off my medicare," or the politicians who insist that government can't do anything right, and to prove it they get into office and do everything wrong.

Yes, government in America is broken and ineffectual. It will only be fixed when we as a people decide that it's time for a government that responds to the needs of the people rather than only the wealthy; when we decide to stop being afraid and end the police state we're living in, and replace it with a government that works. Yes every government has its problems, but not all of them are as broken and destructive as ours. Saying government can't solve problems is part of the problem -- it keeps us from focusing our efforts on the kind of collective action that could actually make a difference.

What say you, brothers? Who is with me?

[crickets]

[tzs]

> and the proposed non-government solutions (such as removing the limitations on the liability of polluters, and allowing those whose health or livelihood has been injured by pollution to sue, potentially by class action) have never even been attempted

That might work in special cases, like the BP oil spill, where you can make a strong case that a specific source contributed to specific harm to specific plaintiffs.

Unfortunately, such incidents are only a very small part of overall pollution. Pollution gets emitted from multiple sources around the state, country, or even world, mixes chaotically in the oceans and atmosphere, and causes damage possibly hundreds or even thousands of miles away from its source, often contributing small amounts of damage at hundreds of places.

Good luck trying to figure out who to sue, and then proving that any of your named defendants actually emitted pollution that caused damage to any particular plaintiff.

[eruditely]

That insanity quote does not extend into probabilistic life. If we see tails tails tails, but we are reasonably sure what is behind the empirical result is a coin. We can flip a few more times and expext heads.