8 ms·
The biggest problem with such a tax is that all countries would have to implement it. When the US is accounting for about 15% of global carbon emissions we can’
by lacker 8y ago
The biggest problem with such a tax is that all countries would have to implement it. When the US is accounting for about 15% of global carbon emissions we can’t solve the problem just by reducing our own carbon emission.
- latch 8y agoThere's no single solution and there will always be a reason not to do something.
- richev 8y agoTrue, but leading by example would be a good start.
- jimmywanger 8y agoWhere are you getting your statistics from? According to a quick Google search, https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html#.W_jwyCeIbq4 https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/sc..., China is the highest emitter, followed by the US, which emits half as much CO2, and India emits half again as much as the US.
- rayvy 8y ago> The biggest problem with such a tax is that all countries would have to implement it. When the US is accounting for about 15% of global carbon emissions Hypothetically provinces/countries could be taxed relative to their emissions (albeit this would take some fantasy-like widely agreed upon criteria).
- bottled_poe 8y agoTrade sanctions are the usual mechanism to influence other governments. I don’t see why this situation would be any different.
- cmrdporcupine 8y agoOr in a more civil way, since it seems we have entered the era of tariffs wars, perhaps countries with carbon taxes should be slapping tariffs on imports from countries with none. Tie the tariff to some metric derived from a country's estimated CO2 emissions, subtracting some amount for % land mass in forests, reforestation efforts, carbon tax rates, deployment of renewables, etc. It would have negative economic consequences in the short term, I'm sure. But put in place by large importers it would directly motivate emission offenders to not play the game of lowest-common-denominator.
- reitzensteinm 8y agoOk, so how about implementing the tax only to the extent required to get per capita emissions down to the global mean?
- lugg 8y agoWhat? That doesn't make sense. Not all countries need to do it. Just most. In in actual fact, the sooner leader countries like the USA do it the sooner other countries get their act together. Don't act like this is all or nothing. It's not. Furthermore, the sooner the USA does it the sooner technologies improve, the sooner other smaller countries are suddenly enabled by said technologies. That aside whole "we all need to do it" is utter nonsense. No, you don't. Other countries taking advantage of you is still not a socially moral excuse. Mind yourself first thanks.
- beginningguava 8y agoThe US led the world in emission reductions in 2018, meanwhile the EU, Canada, India, and China increased their production significantly. Yet the US gets slammed by the global community https://imgur.com/a/sNWFP3k https://imgur.com/a/sNWFP3k
- emj 8y agoGrowing is easy when you start from zero, and reducing is easy when you can easily move your production elsewhere. BP statistical review probably have their numbers right, I'm more concern about the message they want to spread. (I do not say that EU/China should be able to increase their emissions, just that the US is not decreasing its consumption therefore it is impossible to decrease emission)
- usaar333 8y agoBecause the US is so high absolutely. Should it get an award just because natural gas got cheaper than coal?
- yostrovs 8y agoYes it should. It made it happen because instead of having endless meetings and brainstorming sessions in Lesbos or Johannesburg, the heartless ignoramuses of Texas figured out how to drill for clean energy. What really did the brainstormes accomplish considering the chart presented?
- Kiro 8y ago15% is massive. We're discussing the same tax in my country and we're like 0.01%.
- Shivetya 8y agothe US is pretty big as a whole, compared the EU the difference is as extreme. Also, never allow for the discussion to go by per capita as the seriously distorts the numbers in countries where a great deal of the population does not participate
- nickparker 8y agoBorder adjustments are a well understood policy solution to this issue. Imports from polluting countries are taxed appropriately, and exports to those countries subsidized. From the perspective of anyone inside the nation with the border adjustment, it’s as though the whole world implemented the carbon tax.
- fjsolwmv 8y agoThat only works if taxing countries ahave a way to estimate should-be-taxable events in other countries. How do you know of Chieng-Shen's widgets are from polluting factories but Hong Wan's aren't?
- nickparker 8y agoCarbon taxes generally don’t need to be huge to achieve their goals, so anyone without proof they’re clean can be taxed as though they’re filthy.
- andersonvom 8y agoThe US has a little over 4% of the world population, yet it's responsible for 15% of carbon emissions [1]. Even if the US is the only country to implement it, it would already make a huge difference. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
- fjsolwmv 8y agoSo USA could breed a huge population of impovershed underclass to bring average emissions down.