5 ms·
> And when the tax is directly addressing externalities that are normally not paid, it makes the market less distorted. Agree, but that doesn't make the tax a
by zorga 8y ago
> And when the tax is directly addressing externalities that are normally not paid, it makes the market less distorted.
Agree, but that doesn't make the tax a free market solution. A free market solution would be a solution from the market, not a government imposed tax.
- millstone 8y agoA carbon tax is the most market-friendly approach on the table, so is de facto the free market solution, short of "do nothing."
- zorga 8y agoNo. While it may be the most market friendly approach, it's not a free market approach. There is not de facto free market solution, it's entirely possible the free market has no solution; that does not make the best available solution a market solution.
- mrob 8y agoHow will you lower the transaction costs enough that it's practical for polluters to pay compensation directly to all >7 billion victims?
- icebraining 8y agoOne can agree that the tax should be implemented without agreeing with its categorization as a free market solution.
- Dylan16807 8y ago"Solution that maximally utilizes the free market to sort out the details and implementation", perhaps? Then we can avoid disagreement over the definition of "free market solution"
- zorga 8y agoFinally, someone who actually understands the conversation being had. Absolutely correct; carbon taxes might be the best solution available, but they are not a free market solution. You seem to be the only one in this thread with the clarity of thought to see the obvious.
- CuriousSkeptic 8y agoTotally off topic. But I’m curious. With your line of thinking I guess all gonverment imposed rules are anti free market. So if we remove those completely, take away rule of law, abolish property rights and all of that. Would there then exist a market to speak of at all? Would it be “free”?
- acct1771 8y agoBriefly.
- zorga 8y agoMarkets exist with or without government, governments make markets more stable and handle cases of market failures, and markets do fail. But under no case is government intervention a free market solution. Lack of government does not abolish rules or property rights, it just changes how those things are enforced as it leaves everyone to defend their own property and it leaves enforcement of rules to private security forces. I'm not claiming government intervention isn't good; I'm simply arguing you can't call it a free market solution, because it isn't. Taxes are not free market solutions.
- CuriousSkeptic 8y agoWhat would be the process for establishing rules?