The Environment

As H. L. Mencken wrote, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” The EU's Green Deal is the latest example.

While the legislation introduced in the US Congress remains fiction under a Republican executive and senate, the Brussels initiative will become law unless there is considerable opposition from EU member states.

Hunter-gatherer societies stripped the local environment of resources and then moved on to another place. There was nothing environmentally responsible about this sort of economy, in spite of modern efforts to portray prehistoric humans as tree huggers.

Easy-money policies pushed by central banks may be redirecting wealth away from investment, and toward greater production and consumption of cheap consumer goods. That's not "green."

Central planners cannot calculate the costs and benefits of environmental policy.

The State of California is now forcing insurance companies to cover homeowners who put their houses in some of the most fire-prone areas. What could go wrong?

The ECB, always happy to repeat the mistakes of Japan, is likely to start new programs of debt monetization for green projects and claim it is a different, radical and new measure.

Despite the IMF’s claims to the contrary, the case of Sweden actually shows that a political “solution” to climate change is ineffective.

The standard Austrian approach to air pollution and regulation rejects the bean-counting of winners and losers, and instead embraces a property rights approach.

From the beginning, the “97% consensus” claim about climate change has been dubious, with supporters claiming that it represented much more than it really did.