http://disqus.com/by/RobertZ/enFri, 14 Dec 2018 09:58:55 -0000https://jordanbpeterson.com/podcasts/59-bjorn-lomborg/#comment-4241123854<p>The discussion, while useful, seemed to lose track or stumble over a few key realities:</p><p>1. As Dr. Lomborg admits, his method does not account for who pays and who benefits. Quantifying the economic costs of inequality is not impossible, and should be included.</p><p>2. Being right and being effective are not the same thing. Some interventions can ride on the momentum of the moment, while others are an uphill battle. This also does not seem accounted for.</p><p>3. Regarding climate change, the method -- though the notion of present value -- discounts solutions that extend far into the future. Yes, discounting the future is inherent to capitalism, but it rewards short-term thinking and strategies, and overlooks challenges with inherently long systemic delays.</p><p>4. The potential for cataclysmic and irreversible outcomes following global climate change cannot be compared to, say, the terrible things that could happen if a 500 million children are not vaccinated. The latter has been going on for a long time, and the consequences are relatively well understood (and then, often ignored as someone else's problem). No matter what the chances of an extinction-level event, one still has to ask, "What is the value of the planet's ecosystem?" and "What is the value of humanity?" Climate change activists would suggest that the value of those is infinite or at least not monetize-able.</p><p>5. Dr. Lomborg said that eliminating fossil-fuel subsidies is a no-brainer. So what is significant about zero? Subsidies are a negative tax. If carbon is taxed and revenues are re-invested in reducing inequality, and/or vaccinating children and/or eliminating tuberculosis, isn't that a double or a triple win?</p>RobertZFri, 14 Dec 2018 09:58:55 -0000http://blogs.hbr.org/schrage/2012/05/projects-are-the-new-job-inter.html#comment-526630044<p>This is so-called Reality TV applied back to reality. That medium imposes weird, dehumanizing side effects on the reality, and so would this practice. </p><p>Many comments above have alluded to some of these side effects, but for a complete list, spend a few hours with so-called Reality TV (or maybe the Hunger Games?), with notepad in hand and jot down all the weird stuff people do in that particular fishbowl. I'll bet there's little or none of it that would make for an ethical, sustainable and high-performing team.</p><p>So I agree with many of the commenters above -- find ethical and respectful ways of strengthening your evaluation process.</p>RobertZFri, 11 May 2012 15:41:41 -0000