【讀者分享】 經濟學者與科學家的辯論：回應未來能源危機的「Facts」與「Truth」

This piece brings the Simon-Ehrlich wager to mind, which was the bet between economist Julian Simon and biologist Paul Ehrlich in 1980 regarding the future availability and prices of natural resources.

Simon and Ehrlich made a bet based on their differing views on resource scarcity and population growth. Ehrlich, known for his book “The Population Bomb,” predicted that the prices of five selected metals (copper, chromium, nickel, tin, and tungsten) would increase over the next decade due to resource scarcity. Simon, on the other hand, believed that human innovation and market forces would lead to greater abundance and lower prices for these resources over time. The bet was structured such that Ehrlich would pay Simon the difference in the prices of the selected metals ten years later, based on inflation-adjusted prices. If the prices of the metals went up, Simon would pay Ehrlich.

In 1990, at the end of the wager period, the prices of all five metals selected by Ehrlich had decreased significantly. Ehrlich lost the bet and paid Simon an amount based on the difference in prices. This outcome supported Simon's argument that human innovation, technological advancements, and market mechanisms can lead to increased resource availability and lower prices over time. 

This wager is often cited in discussions about resource scarcity, the role of technology and innovation in resource management, and the limits to growth theories. It highlighted the importance of considering human ingenuity and market dynamics in addressing challenges related to resource availability and environmental issues.

In today's interconnected and technology-driven financial landscape, markets across different asset classes are more volatile and highly correlated. In addition, trading is increasingly influenced by machine-learning algorithms, making the outcome of a bet similar to the Simon-Ehrlich wager even more unpredictable and extending well beyond the scope of the original argument.

The intricate interplay of global factors, rapid information dissemination, and algorithmic trading mechanisms could introduce additional layers of complexity to such a bet. Factors such as high-frequency trading, algorithmic biases, and the speed of market reactions to news and events could significantly impact the prices of resources or assets in question. Therefore, making a similar bet in this day and age would likely involve a more nuanced understanding of market dynamics and technological influences, underscoring the evolving nature of resource pricing and the challenges of forecasting in a technologically advanced financial environment.

▶️ 李偉才博士帶大家討論環境議題：環保社運、全球暖化、解決方法
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1vhjXRf4ao