I would tend to agree with you on the distrust of politicians; however I believe that it is important to distinguish between taxes primarily meant to raise mone

I would tend to agree with you on the distrust of politicians; however I believe that it is important to distinguish between taxes primarily meant to raise money and taxes primarily meant to cause a change in behavior. What I am trying to get at is: the income tax, for example, exists so that governments can finance their operations. A heavy tax on cigarettes, on the other hand, is meant to change the population's behavior - to push smokers to quit. The extra revenue is useful but not the main point of the legislation. The goal is to reduce the number of smokers. Such as it would be with a carbon tax. As someone thoroughly concerned with the state of our habitat, I would be thrilled to see a carbon tax here in the US - even if the politicians took the extra money raised by the tax and burned it. The point of a carbon tax is to reduce carbon emissions; raised monies are a secondary benefit.