2 ms·
Of course we shouldn't. What we need is one simple rule: you pay for the damage caused by your indulgence. If you can, fire away your jets. If you can't, don
by yongjik 11y ago
Of course we shouldn't. What we need is one simple rule: you pay for the damage caused by your indulgence.
If you can, fire away your jets. If you can't, don't. Just like every other aspect of life in a capitalistic society. I mean, can you imagine the chutzpah of hedge fund managers who claim they should be exempt from carbon tax because they are rich? Oh dear.
* Why are we talking about carbon tax here anyway?
- nihonde 11y agoI think you're assuming that paying for damage is equivalent to correcting it, which is a seriously broken assumption.
- yongjik 11y ago"Paying for damage" seems working pretty well for national parks. Besides, the choice right now is not between paying and correcting, but between paying and not paying. Perfect is the enemy of better.