3 ms·
Not if the revenue is spent on something worse than the externality. Also not if the revenue creates a self perpetuating monster that will devour more revenue
by ryanwaggoner 10y ago
Not if the revenue is spent on something worse than the externality.
Also not if the revenue creates a self perpetuating monster that will devour more revenue even when the externality is gone.
And while we're on the subject, doesn't it seem the least bit concerning that funding specific pork through taxes on diffuse externalities creates a pretty huge incentive to keep that externality going? Who came up with the idea to let the people responsible for eliminating the externality also benefit from the taxes you get from it?
- vram22 10y agoWhat's pork, in this context? Not fully familiar with American slang.
- tfm 10y agoIt's short for "pork barrelling", which refers to public money that is allocated by government to projects in specific areas to sweeten the local voters. Typical examples might be the announcement of new roads or sporting facility, or the awarding of a large government contract to a major local employer, especially just after an election has been declared. The term itself was not originally pejorative (a barrel full of pork can feed a lot of mouths!) but it is generally used negatively by the press or cynically by certain government sectors.
- vram22 10y agoGot it now, thanks.