3 ms·
Actually, that law in Seattle that allowed trash collectors to rummage through your trash was ruled unconstitutional under the state constitution as a violation
by nostromo 9y ago
Actually, that law in Seattle that allowed trash collectors to rummage through your trash was ruled unconstitutional under the state constitution as a violation of privacy.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/judge-seattle-trash-check-ordinance-unconstitutional/ http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/judge-seat...
That aside, I think a smarter solution is taxing the actual thing you don't want (carbon in the air via a carbon tax) rather than second order things (gasoline cars).
It's much more effective. For example, if your Tesla is being powered by coal, you're doing almost nothing for the environment by switching to electric. So we need to set up the incentives thoughtfully, rather than being reactionary.
- vkou 9y ago> Actually, that law in Seattle that allowed trash collectors to rummage through your trash was ruled unconstitutional under the state constitution as a violation of privacy. This is a peculiarity of Washington state. In much of the US, and the world, once your garbage is on the curb, there is zero expectation of privacy. (And yes, I agree that we want to punish the real externality, which can be done by taxing, or banning coal, petroleum...) However, forcing a switch to electric, without banning fossil fuels would still be a net gain - an electric vehicle powered by fossil fuels produces fewer GHGs per mile driven then a gasoline one.
- greglindahl 9y agoNearly all economists agree that a carbon tax would be less distorting, but politics. You know.