Tuesday, August 20, 2002

Times runneth over
"Conservation ecology" and its discontents. Conservationists consider logging the Congo.

Also in the Times today, Barbara Crossette explains the UN's downscaled population estimates (and the limitations of demographers), Jane Brody discusses the psychology of risk perception (i.e., why people are afraid of stupid things, like asbestos), and a long story on the Johannesburg conference [the BBC anatomizes its irrelevance], while Denise Grady explains how development creates infectious disease. An article on development economics observes: "the level of discrepancy between what people do and what we as economists think they should do can be pretty substantial." Bonus: the Ecole normale superieure is called "a top college in France." The NAS report on GE animals is here. (Cf. this report on this article [requires license] in Transgenic Research about the risk of extinction posed by GE salmon.)

That's the NY Times, not In These Times. You can tell, because Krugman lays into Bush some more:

As my colleague Frank Rich points out, to offset the revenue losses from his tax cut, Mr. Bush would have to veto a $5 billion spending proposal every working day for the next year. Mr. Bush can no longer pretend, as he did during the 2000 campaign, that there is enough money for everything. Now, to justify that tax cut, he must hack steadily away at programs that matter to ordinary people....

Yet conservatives enthusiastically rely on populism � fake populism, based on staged shmoozing with ordinary Americans and attacks on the imagined cultural elitism of the liberal media. Why shouldn't liberals, who actually have the facts on their side, try engaging in the real thing?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

©2002-2005 by the author