I like the Freakonomics blog, even though I often disagree with some of the conclusions they make (or at least imply). For example, Wednesday's post about how the recession will affect "clean" technology is somewhat lacking.

Fortunately, I don't have to explain my position, because I agree 100% with my good friend Dave, who gave me the following response:

I like how they mention the price relationship between nonrenewables and renewables as a key factor in adoption of clean tech. They also point out that some politicians support policies which directly affect this relationship (cap-and-trade, regulations, etc.). However, they do not mention how such policies affect the economy beyond this tiny subset which could nullify or at least lessen the intended effect in the first place.

For example, tighter regulations cause the price of nonrenewables to rise (eg. cap-and-trade overhead) which make renewables more attractive. However, increased prices of nonrenewables is supply-side inflationary which would act as a tax on the economy, lessening growth. Lower growth could mean less demand for energy, which would cause nonrenewable prices to lower – nullifying the intended action.

True, forcing nonrenewable prices higher is good for clean tech, the focus of the article, but that's not necessarily a good thing.

It's amazing to me how people get sucked into the idea that such government action necessarily will prevent some horrendous failure in the future. This Minority Report–style prediction is impossible to disprove (unless you happen to have a trio of doped-up precogs floating in your jacuzzi, which would lead to other concerns). Yet I just heard this morning on the radio (or maybe it was yesterday) an interview in which an economist stated matter-of-factly that spending money now definitely will prevent some catastrophe in the future, without providing any kind of reasoning or evidence for his viewpoint. Apparently, we're supposed to just believe him because, after all, he is an economist.

What I don't get is why people continue to trust such "professionals." Aren't these the same people who predicted that we'd continue to see indefinite growth in the tech boom of the nineties? And aren't they the same ones who, six months ago, were saying that oil would never drop below $80 a barrel? Now, they say that more government spending will make things better – disregard the fact that we've already spent more than a trillion dollars on economic stimuli and bailouts over the last year.

It's very frustrating.