2 ms·

The government should rather use high taxes on fossil-fuels so the market can efficiently work, instead of trying to micromanage with all these subsidies, speci

The government should rather use high taxes on fossil-fuels so the market can efficiently work, instead of trying to micromanage with all these subsidies, special rules, outright bans, and other "incentive programs".

paublyrne 9y ago
Wouldn't applying high taxes also be 'micromanaging'? And why do you think the market, guided by tax changes or not, should decide on how long we keep building combustion engine cars? If the market wanted to keep them around for a hundred years, until the oil runs out, would that be ok, given what we know about how damaging the emissions from cars are?
- ekianjo 9y ago
  High taxes still leave some space for innovation compared to a straight ban.
  - em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
    That answers the first question, "Wouldn't applying high taxes also be 'micromanaging'?" For the second question "And why do you think the market, guided by tax changes or not, should decide on how long we keep building combustion engine cars?" I would say because the market under a fossil-fuel tax will do a better job at optimizing for what ought to be the desired ultimate goal of fewer fossil-fuel emissions overall instead of simply meeting what is an unnecessary side-goal of no fossil-fuel-burning cars. For the third question, "If the market wanted to keep them around for a hundred years, until the oil runs out, would that be ok, given what we know about how damaging the emissions from cars are?", I would say a large-enough fossil-fuel tax would cause humans to not use up the remaining oil as fast as these other schemes.
loonattic 9y ago
That's a good way to screw over poor people who have to commute..
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
  Don't necessarily have to punish poor people in net. The revenue from such a fossil-fuel tax could be either redistributed directly to everyone (the so-called "revenue-neutral" carbon tax) or the revenue could be used by the government to provide services to the poor. The more important question you comment skips over is: should people (poor or not) be commuting significant distances using fossil fuels in the first place? Such a tax on fossil-fuels will naturally cause employees & employers to be physically closer.

paublyrne 9y ago

Wouldn't applying high taxes also be 'micromanaging'? And why do you think the market, guided by tax changes or not, should decide on how long we keep building combustion engine cars? If the market wanted to keep them around for a hundred years, until the oil runs out, would that be ok, given what we know about how damaging the emissions from cars are?

ekianjo 9y ago
High taxes still leave some space for innovation compared to a straight ban.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
  That answers the first question, "Wouldn't applying high taxes also be 'micromanaging'?" For the second question "And why do you think the market, guided by tax changes or not, should decide on how long we keep building combustion engine cars?" I would say because the market under a fossil-fuel tax will do a better job at optimizing for what ought to be the desired ultimate goal of fewer fossil-fuel emissions overall instead of simply meeting what is an unnecessary side-goal of no fossil-fuel-burning cars. For the third question, "If the market wanted to keep them around for a hundred years, until the oil runs out, would that be ok, given what we know about how damaging the emissions from cars are?", I would say a large-enough fossil-fuel tax would cause humans to not use up the remaining oil as fast as these other schemes.

loonattic 9y ago

That's a good way to screw over poor people who have to commute..

em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
Don't necessarily have to punish poor people in net. The revenue from such a fossil-fuel tax could be either redistributed directly to everyone (the so-called "revenue-neutral" carbon tax) or the revenue could be used by the government to provide services to the poor. The more important question you comment skips over is: should people (poor or not) be commuting significant distances using fossil fuels in the first place? Such a tax on fossil-fuels will naturally cause employees & employers to be physically closer.