If pollution is such a bad thing, why do economists argue that the optimal amount of pollution is something greater than zero?

answer

watching

294

views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

You have 0 free answers left.
Get unlimited access to 3.8 million step-by-step answers.

Get unlimited access

Already have an account? Log in

Beverley SmithLv2

28 Apr 2019

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.

Already have an account? Log in

Related questions

Why do economists argue that an emissions tax is a more efficient way to reduce pollution than an environmental standard?

rubyrhinoceros118

Economists argue that the level of pollution should be:

A. reduced completely to zero because, by definition, it is a negative external effect.
B. ignored because it has always been present since the beginning of history.
C. reduced to the point where the marginal benefit of pollution reduction is equal to the marginal cost of pollution reduction to society.
D. best determined by elected officials who can speak on behalf of the public.

fuchsiabear607

Give me some information on taxing pollution. Discuss it using the ideas of externality, supply, and demand. How do we determine the optimal level of pollution? Is the optimal level of pollution zero? Why or why not?