Brad De Long wrote: >I'm not going to defend Lant Pritchett's inept and overwritten memo, or >Lawrence Summers' signing it (although I would note that >Summers-as-academic is known for giving credit to RAs and elevating them to >co-author and lead-author status much more than most of his ilk). > >But there is a serious issue here. In Ghana--where 60% of the urban >population has no access to the sewer system, where 70% of energy still >comes from burning wood and charcoal (and where rain acidity as a result at >times reaches Black Forest levels), where 40% of people drink contaminated >water, and where 15% of people suffer from waterborne diseases--should >taxicabs have to have catalytic converters installed? Is that what Summers/Pritchett meant by "I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that"? It was about catalytic converters? >There is also a fourth argument: What business is it of anyone in the first >world telling people in developing countries that they can or cannot >pollute? Which people in "developing" countries? The capitalists and politicians, or the folks who'll have to live next to the impeccably pedigreed load of toxic waste? >But these are hard and serious issues where I don't think I have many (if >any) of the answers. I certainly don't have "the" answers, but one point seems pretty unassailable - in countries that are lightly industrialized, should they just imitate the heavily industrialized countries, embracing (or having thrust upon them) the filthier industries? Or should they try to do it right from scratch? Doug
