3 ms·

I see inefficient-yet-hybrid SUVs in Pittsburgh, yet more-efficient-yet-gasoline-only subcompacts would be banned. I frequently see people who won't alter thei

by ponow 8y ago

I see inefficient-yet-hybrid SUVs in Pittsburgh, yet more-efficient-yet-gasoline-only subcompacts would be banned. I frequently see people who won't alter their own wasteful practices (always buying new things, instead of re-using or repairing old ones, for example), yet virtue signal by buying green, driving hybrid, etc. If you really want root out the causes, we need to measure all the contributors, including people's life choices (living in suburbia, eating meat, etc.). Pretty soon it becomes clear how draconian that would be. Cost is a pretty good proxy for all of that, yet leaves people free.

robocat 8y ago
The (unsubsidised) cost of a product or service already exists as a reasonable proxy for waste and petroleum usage. Are you suggesting we add carbon and pollution taxes to offset some of the the externalities? Your income level is a superb indicator of how much of the planets resources you are using. Does taxation that goes to the government change that? Does the government use taxes more "greenly" than consumers? On topic: if they shut down the centre of Madrid, they could get pollution to zero!
- llukas 8y ago
  > Your income level is a superb indicator of how much of the planets resources you are using. Not really. Your spending level is. One can have high income and reinvest or you can spend money you don't have by borrowing. I'd agree that income level is correlated.
- PeterStuer 8y ago
  >The (unsubsidised) cost of a product or service already exists as a reasonable proxy for waste and petroleum usage. Not even close; If market economies are good at one thing, it is finding products that concentrate their benefits while at the same time distributing their negative externalities.