> ...them...them...them... It's not just us vs them. There's at least a third group: future generations. In a realpolitic sense, should we allow "them" to scre

> ...them...them...them... It's not just us vs them. There's at least a third group: future generations. In a realpolitic sense, should we allow "them" to screw over the future generations because of "our" blame attribution (correct or not)? Reconsider the percentage of 50%: at what percentage do you change your stance? 40%? 30%? 20%? 10%? 5%? 2%? 1%? or absolutely strictly 0%? Suppose this passes at some non-zero percentage, you are of course free to buy into Republican membership (or perhaps Democrat or other climate sceptic membershipif say a Green party or other succeeds in passing this) and reveal your true colors if you refuse to pay the larger tax... A systemic problem needs a systemic solution, up till now it has been mostly the system moralizing the individual (who realises all too well we need a systemic solution) The future generations would look back and see who can't prove they were in the added ecotax paying bracket..., of course they would see it is totally unfair, but as the problem becomes ever more urgent, the question becomes less and less about what is fair, but more and more about how the f!ck we are going to implement a timely and systemic solution, regardless of fairness... It seems like this puzzle forces one to rediscover the true meaning of humanism, patriotism and sacrifice.