260
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
260 points (92.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43831 readers
873 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
You are making this too complicated. The "classic example" of a negative externality isn't carbon emissions, it's the "tragedy of the commons". People would overuse public land to graze their animals. Nobody took care of the public land or refrained from grazing to allow the grass to grow back, so it sucked.
A better example of a positive externality is a nice cafe that provides a nice environment for a town. The cafe doesn't just provide sandwiches and coffee. It improves the area around it and nearby businesses benefit.
this is a capitalist myth. the british peasantry maintained the commons until capitalist interests enclosed them.
No, it's a well studied phenomenon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
this does not prove it's not capitalist propaganda. (it is).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Criticism
keep scrolling