Can We Afford The Future

According to many scientists, climate change is a growing threat to life as we know it, requiring a large-scale, immediate response. According to many economists, climate change is a moderately important problem; the best policy is a slow, gradual start, to avoid spending too much. They can't both be right. In this book, Frank Ackerman offers a refreshing look at the economics of climate change, explaining how the arbitrary assumptions of conventional theories get in the way of understanding this urgent problem. The benefits of climate protection are vital but priceless, and hence often devalued in cost-benefit calculations. Preparation for the most predictable outcomes of global warming is less important than protection against the growing risk of catastrophic change; massive investment in new, low carbon technologies and industries should be thought of as life insurance for the planet. Ackerman makes an impassioned plea to construct a better economics, arguing that the solutions are affordable and the alternative is unthinkable. If we can't afford the future, what are we saving our money for? Can we Afford the Future? is part of The New Economics series, which uses the ideas behind a new, more human economics to provide a fresh way of looking at major contemporary issues.

On aging, and its affect on Society

Throughout the Western world, a whole generation is being priced out of the housing market. For millions of people, particularly millennials, the basic goal of acquiring decent, affordable accommodation is a distant dream. Leading economist Josh Ryan-Collins argues that to understand this crisis, we must examine a crucial paradox at the heart of modern capitalism. The interaction of private home ownership and a lightly regulated commercial banking system leads to a feedback cycle. Unlimited credit and money flows into an inherently finite supply of property, which causes rising house prices, declining home ownership, rising inequality and debt, stagnant growth and financial instability. Radical reforms are needed to break the cycle. This engaging and topical book will be essential reading for anyone who wants to understand why they can’t find an affordable home, and what we can do about it.

'The genius of Graciela Chichilnisky is recognized by economists and with this book she has focused that talent to the dire problem facing mankind. To survive we must do more than stave off a further rise of CO₂ in the atmosphere. We need to reverse it if the planet is to be viable. Professor Chichilnisky's achievement along with her co-author Peter Bal is to show us the way to rescue our future.'Professor Edmund Phelps2006 Nobel Laureate in EconomicsDirector, Center on Capitalism and Society, Columbia University'In the world of economic theory, Graciela Chichilnisky is an A-list star.'The Washington Post'The team of Chichilnisky and Bal has exceptional skill in explaining complex topics with great clarity making it easy for non-scientists interested in climate change to read. They address the science of climate change, the complex international negotiations needed to reach a compromise between developing nations and the developed ones, and importantly the urgent need to find a way of extracting CO₂ from the atmosphere and utilizing and sequestering it in a commercially profitable manner. The last topic has been almost completely ignored by the media.'Theodore Roosevelt IVManaging Director & Chairman of Barclays Cleantech InitiativeBARCLAYSThe Kyoto Protocol capped the emissions of the main emitters, the industrialized countries, one by one. It also created an innovative financial mechanism, the Carbon Market and its Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which allows developing nations to receive carbon credits when they reduce their emissions below their baselines. The carbon market, an economic system that created a price for carbon for the first time, is now used in four continents, is promoted by the World Bank, and is recommended even by leading oil and gas companies. However, one critical problem for the future of the Kyoto Protocol is the continuing impasse between the rich and the poor nations.Who should reduce emissions — the rich or the poor countries?