Message Number: 209
From: Lisa Hsu <lisashoe Æ gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:34:44 -0400
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: Behind Gold's Glitter: Torn Lands and Pointed Questions
------=_Part_2223_32094197.1130258084325
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

actually, the article said india is #1 and we're #2, so something like that
could probably make an impact.

On 10/25/05, Kevin Lochner   wrote:
>
> Wouldn't a land-damage tax be more appropriate? That's what economics
> dictates for negative externalities, and probably a stronger incentive
> than guilt trips. Of course, it's harder to impose taxes in foreign
> countries than to stop buying gold, but our (US consumer) gold consumption 
> pales in comparison to the far east (esp india).
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Daniel Reeves wrote:
>
> > Never buy anything gold. Check.
> >
> > --- \/ FROM mjste Æ umich.edu AT 05.10.25 08:46 (Today) \/ ---
> >
> > > This page was sent to you by: mjste Æ umich.edu.
> > >
> > > This article is fascinating. I would love your comments on this. Do
> you
> > > think that it is worth it?
> > >
> > >
> > > INTERNATIONAL | October 24, 2005
> > > The Cost of Gold | 30 Tons an Ounce: Behind Gold's Glitter: Torn Lands 
> > > and Pointed Questions
> > > By JANE PERLEZ and KIRK JOHNSON
> > > Much of the gold left to be mined is microscopic and is being wrung
> from
> > > the earth at enormous environmental cost.
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/international/24GOLD.html?emc=3Deta1 
> >
> > --
> > http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - google://"Daniel Reeves"
> >
> > "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong."
> > -- Wolfgang Pauli, on a paper submitted by a physicist colleague
> >
>

------=_Part_2223_32094197.1130258084325
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

actually, the article said india is #1 and we're #2, so something like that 
could probably make an impact.	    On 10/25/05,  Kevin Lochner  < 
klochner Æ eecs.umich.edu > wrote:  Wouldn't a land-damage tax be more
appropriate?   That's what economics
 dictates for negative externalities, and probably a stronger incentive than
guilt trips.  Of course, it's harder to impose taxes in foreign  countries than
to stop buying gold, but our (US consumer) gold consumption 
 pales in comparison to the far east (esp india).   On Tue, 25 Oct  2005,
Daniel Reeves wrote:  > Never buy anything gold.   ;Check. > > ---
\/   FROM  mjste Æ umich.edu
  AT 05.10.25 08:46 (Today)   \/ --- > > > This  page was sent to you
by:  mjste Æ umich.edu  . > > > > This article is fascinating.
I would love your  comments on this. Do you
 > > think that it is worth it? > > > > >	>
INTERNATIONAL | October 24, 2005 > > The Cost of Gold | 30 Tons  an
Ounce: Behind Gold's Glitter: Torn Lands > > and Pointed Questions 
 > > By JANE PERLEZ and KIRK JOHNSON > > Much of the gold  left to
be mined is microscopic and is being wrung from > > the earth  at
enormous environmental cost. > >	
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/international/24GOLD.html?emc=3Deta1	>
> -- >  http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves	- -  google ://"Daniel
Reeves"
 > > "This isn't right.  This isn't even wrong." ; >    --
Wolfgang Pauli, on a paper submitted  by a physicist colleague >    

------=_Part_2223_32094197.1130258084325--