Judging Economics

I have always had difficulty with both Pigou and Coase, and the trouble could be found rooted in a Footnote of this Paper:

7 According to Richard Posner, "a social cost diminishes the wealth of society; a private cost
rearranges that wealth." Economic Analysis of Law 6th ed. (New York: Aspen Publishers, 2003), p.
6.

Externalities must be vocalized in some form, else they go unrecognized as either Social Cost or Private Cost. This though brings on a Time Constraint which itself must be vocalized, otherwise externalities become simple taxation of Property rights whenever Someone can (find) some externality which has not been exploited. Do I seem to favor Coase then? I think not, because he cannot effectively link Private and Public purpose. This Paper would like to tie externalities to economic efficiency, but the Paper again prints a Footnote:

10 Although mutually beneficial agreements are always Pareto efficient, this example shows why
using Pareto efficiency as a basis for public policy can mask serious moral rights violations. This
is the case whenever the allocation of resources (or rights over resources) from which Pareto
improvements take place is itself unjust.

And also this Footnote:

13 One reason Coase may be tempted to eschew responsibility is that from an economic
perspective a harm done is a sunk cost. And since economic agents (or judges considering the
case from an economic standpoint) are forward-looking, the question about who is to blame is
naturally substituted with the question of who it would be most efficient to blame. This forwardlooking,
consequentialist conception of blame, however, does not merely change our concept of
responsibility. It destroys it by reducing questions about liability to economic considerations.

What is wrong with Coase, Pigou, and this Paper resides in the Concept of Property Rights. Can Property Rights to anything be subscribed unilaterally to Anyone, when development of those natural resources extend beyond the Generations of both Those who inflict Harm, and Those who are the Victims? Can there ever be a Pareto efficiency when future Costs extends far beyond the constituent economic activity? Coase, Pigou, and this Paper refuse to evaluate magnitudes of injury, and duration of the damage. Those who destroyed the Cedar of Lebanon to build Ships and Temples felt justified, but where are the forests of Lebanon today? Fresh Water reserves are disappearing from this Country every year, and succeeding Generations will pay the real price for such damage, but what are the Transaction Costs here? lgl