3 ms·

I wish we would elect leaders that introduce a carbon tax.

CalRobert 10y ago
Thus the democracy problem. So long as people feel they benefit more than they suffer from over-exploitation of the common resource (in this case, the atmosphere, which we use as a dump for our emissions), they will vote against any such tax. Of course, it's kind of a prisoners' dilemma problem, since country A passing a carbon tax (and reducing consumption accordingly) makes fossil fuels cheaper for country B. There are ways to address this, like adding import duties on products from countries who dump their garbage in the atmosphere, but those are fairly unpopular too since people like being able to buy cheap stuff from China.
- justin66 10y ago
  > Thus the democracy problem. So long as people feel they benefit more than they suffer from over-exploitation of the common resource (in this case, the atmosphere, which we use as a dump for our emissions), they will vote against any such tax. We don't actually get to vote for individual taxes. The world would be an interesting, and quite different, place if you provided the voter with an accounting summary and asked them to choose line items, etc. etc. People currently have little idea how their money is spent and little say in how to change it.
  - CalRobert 10y ago
    But people do vote on particular pet issues like a carbon tax. Grey Davis was crucified politically by Schwarzenegger for a supposed increase in the "car tax" when in fact he was letting a previous discount on the vehicle registration fee lapse due to the state's serious budgetary issues. The candidate who says "we need to increase the cost of fossil fuels so you use less of them.." won't even have an audience listening for the second part - "...to save the planet from pretty much boiling to death and ending civilization as we know it". Though, cynic that I am, I worry that most drivers would prefer billions dying to paying more for fuel. Maybe that's just because I spent too much of my life in southern California, though. Gas prices are one of those issues people vote on emotionally rather than logically. While I'm not crazy about his approach to personal finance, I'm always reminded of something Dave Ramsey said (I had a coworker years ago who listened to him on the radio). "You guys complained about gas to no end when it was expensive, but now that we're at a buck a gallon do you feel rich?" The point being that the importance of fuel prices are overestimated in the average person's budget.
    - justin66 10y ago
      Good points about gas prices. It's also silly the way people assume oil prices are all a matter of government policy, as opposed to the business cycle. So much about being perceived as a successful politician at the national level is about entering at the right moment, when the economy is on the upswing, or about to be. > But people do vote on particular pet issues like a carbon tax. California's rather unusual. At the national level, which is what matters most, we don't do taxation by referendum. I'm not advocating that, either. The current system would work fine if people put a little more effort into understanding the budget and pressing their candidates to form positions. > The candidate who says "we need to increase the cost of fossil fuels so you use less of them.." won't even have an audience listening for the second part - "...to save the planet from pretty much boiling to death and ending civilization as we know it". Well, they do have something of an audience, but that audience is somewhat diminished by the brain-damaged nature of the American public when it comes to understanding science. But it's not as if messages of self-sacrifice for the common good always go unheard.
- WallowC_33 10y ago
  I tend to lean on the "Do people feel that way? Or are we told to feel that way?" Let's not pretend we're making our decisions on these things in some kind of vacuum. We're battered with "buy this, support the economy, drive your car" propaganda. How much of the 24/7 news cycle is dedicated to intelligently discussing the environment? Not much. How much is spent detailing what companies are up, which ones are down, and oh shit did you hear about BrAngelina getting divorced? We're told that is the important stuff and let others worry about this other stuff. It's too hard for me to accept that we have a democracy that actually cares about the concerns of the people. It all just feels like a ballot stuffed online poll.
- WorldMaker 10y ago
  It's definitely the largest tragedy of the commons in our species' history thus far.
  - CalRobert 10y ago
    Perhaps it will be the last.

Thus the democracy problem. So long as people feel they benefit more than they suffer from over-exploitation of the common resource (in this case, the atmosphere, which we use as a dump for our emissions), they will vote against any such tax. Of course, it's kind of a prisoners' dilemma problem, since country A passing a carbon tax (and reducing consumption accordingly) makes fossil fuels cheaper for country B. There are ways to address this, like adding import duties on products from countries who dump their garbage in the atmosphere, but those are fairly unpopular too since people like being able to buy cheap stuff from China.

justin66 10y ago
> Thus the democracy problem. So long as people feel they benefit more than they suffer from over-exploitation of the common resource (in this case, the atmosphere, which we use as a dump for our emissions), they will vote against any such tax. We don't actually get to vote for individual taxes. The world would be an interesting, and quite different, place if you provided the voter with an accounting summary and asked them to choose line items, etc. etc. People currently have little idea how their money is spent and little say in how to change it.
- CalRobert 10y ago
  But people do vote on particular pet issues like a carbon tax. Grey Davis was crucified politically by Schwarzenegger for a supposed increase in the "car tax" when in fact he was letting a previous discount on the vehicle registration fee lapse due to the state's serious budgetary issues. The candidate who says "we need to increase the cost of fossil fuels so you use less of them.." won't even have an audience listening for the second part - "...to save the planet from pretty much boiling to death and ending civilization as we know it". Though, cynic that I am, I worry that most drivers would prefer billions dying to paying more for fuel. Maybe that's just because I spent too much of my life in southern California, though. Gas prices are one of those issues people vote on emotionally rather than logically. While I'm not crazy about his approach to personal finance, I'm always reminded of something Dave Ramsey said (I had a coworker years ago who listened to him on the radio). "You guys complained about gas to no end when it was expensive, but now that we're at a buck a gallon do you feel rich?" The point being that the importance of fuel prices are overestimated in the average person's budget.
  - justin66 10y ago
    Good points about gas prices. It's also silly the way people assume oil prices are all a matter of government policy, as opposed to the business cycle. So much about being perceived as a successful politician at the national level is about entering at the right moment, when the economy is on the upswing, or about to be. > But people do vote on particular pet issues like a carbon tax. California's rather unusual. At the national level, which is what matters most, we don't do taxation by referendum. I'm not advocating that, either. The current system would work fine if people put a little more effort into understanding the budget and pressing their candidates to form positions. > The candidate who says "we need to increase the cost of fossil fuels so you use less of them.." won't even have an audience listening for the second part - "...to save the planet from pretty much boiling to death and ending civilization as we know it". Well, they do have something of an audience, but that audience is somewhat diminished by the brain-damaged nature of the American public when it comes to understanding science. But it's not as if messages of self-sacrifice for the common good always go unheard.
WallowC_33 10y ago
I tend to lean on the "Do people feel that way? Or are we told to feel that way?" Let's not pretend we're making our decisions on these things in some kind of vacuum. We're battered with "buy this, support the economy, drive your car" propaganda. How much of the 24/7 news cycle is dedicated to intelligently discussing the environment? Not much. How much is spent detailing what companies are up, which ones are down, and oh shit did you hear about BrAngelina getting divorced? We're told that is the important stuff and let others worry about this other stuff. It's too hard for me to accept that we have a democracy that actually cares about the concerns of the people. It all just feels like a ballot stuffed online poll.
WorldMaker 10y ago
It's definitely the largest tragedy of the commons in our species' history thus far.
- CalRobert 10y ago
  Perhaps it will be the last.