>Okay, why hasn't a carbon tax, the most basic example of an applied cost externality been applied yet?
Greed. Politicians are afraid to try it. But you knew that already and you're grasping at straws. Pretending that the majority of economists are against externality taxes like the carbon tax is a lie, and you've already been corrected for it. Not much more to say, but keep trying.
Do you see the difference? Do you see the collective shrug? Do you see the eye rolling, the cultural alignment with entrenched industrial interests? Do you see how they position themselves as the science -> policy gateway, and basically only offer "weak sauce" solutions? Ones that anyone with any superficial awareness of politics, globalization, undermining regulation, and bending the law would recognize that those "market based solutions" were designed to fail?
Can you see that, or are you blind?
That statement is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Worship of markets above all else. Contempt of regulation. Ok sure, it was 1997.
... why isn't there anything more recent? STRONG statements by the critical economic think tanks and departments of the land, those critical policy translators providing guidance to politicians... why isn't there a statement on par with the scientific community?
WHY?
One other thing... are you an adjunct professor or a TA? Even if you are chaired, you know about adjuncts and TAs. The slave labor class of higher education, part of the disenfranchisement of the current generation. The result of market forces to undermine the entrenched rent-seeking behavior of chaired tenured professorships.
Does anyone in your economics department care? I doubt it.
Greed. Politicians are afraid to try it. But you knew that already and you're grasping at straws. Pretending that the majority of economists are against externality taxes like the carbon tax is a lie, and you've already been corrected for it. Not much more to say, but keep trying.