How can you not read an article that starts like this?
There is an unofficial code of conduct that dictates how intellectuals should behave when they’re jousting with each other, a sort of Geneva Convention for the ivory tower.
Before they attack somebody else’s work, they first need to praise their opponent. A typical way to do so is to describe another professor as a distinguished scholar who has made an important contribution to the research literature. When you hear that, you can be pretty sure things are about to get nasty.
The rest of us can usually ignore these spats, but once in a while there is an academic fight that really matters. The economics profession is engaged in one of those right now and, as luck would have it, it’s even more entertaining than most.
Last week, Sir Nicholas Stern, a top adviser to the British government, came to the United States to talk about climate change. In October, a commission he led released a 700-page report calling for “urgent action” against global warming to prevent economic damage that could rival that of the world wars and the Great Depression. Given its source and its tone, the Stern Review has nudged people to talk more seriously about climate change.
Keeping feeling the love right here ... you won't learn much new about the debate over the Stern Report:
- Stern doesn't discount
- Mainstream economists think you ought to
- The worse case scenario is pretty bad
- Forget the benefit cost analysis
- Bring on the carbon tax or cap-and-trade
But, the story sure it a fun read.
