Saving the tiger has become an issue fraught with much discussion — and much of it is ill-informed and misleading.  On the one hand are the tiger-farm lobby and the so-called “believers of free-market economics” such as John Stossel (ABC 20/20) , Terry Anderson (PERC) and Barun Mitra (Liberty Institute).  They want to lift the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) ban and favor open trade in tiger-parts.  They cite the apparent failure of the ban as the primary reason for lifting the ban.  Their arguments, they say, derive from free-market economics.  On the other hand are numerous (possibly insignificant because they lack the voice) individuals who, lacking voice, have opted for the exit option and have modified their behavior to save the most charismatic of animals, the wild tiger.  Alongside are many governments and many, many NGOs that struggle to save the tiger from extinction, that struggle to keep our world one species richer and which work to enable our future generations to look at the king of the forest, the tiger, in reality, not just in picture-books.  Apart from humane motives, their arguments are supported by economists, sociologists, zoologists, conservation-biologists, etc.

Read more of this story »

According to today’s New York Times, “supporters of the bailout proposal had argued that it was necessary to avoid a collapse of the economic system, a calamity that would drag down not just Wall Street investment houses but possibly the savings and portfolios of millions of Americans. Opponents said the bill was cobbled together in too much haste and might amount to throwing good money from taxpayers after bad investments from Wall Street gamblers.”

Read more of this story »