4 ms·

Indeed. Many companies are affected by the environment, so this tax would serve to directly ensure a long-term cost is also a short-term cost, such that the mar

Indeed. Many companies are affected by the environment, so this tax would serve to directly ensure a long-term cost is also a short-term cost, such that the market does not ignore it.

willis936 7y ago
I’ve been of this thinking for a while, but have read that small scale carbon tax tests have not yielded positive results. I still don’t understand how that could be, but I’m not a macroeconomics expert.
- amelius 7y ago
  Perhaps the best thing to do first is purely administrative: place a tax on carbon and immediately subsidize the companies so the net effect is zero. That way we buy some time to get accounting right and prevent a mass shock to the economic systems.
  - smolder 7y ago
    We don't have time. A mass shock is inevitable. Deferring it makes it worse.
    - amelius 7y ago
      One of the problems with (and arguments against) carbon taxing is that you'd have to apply it globally to maintain a level playing field. Companies will not accept a carbon tax unless it is applied fairly. Having the accounting in place increases trust in the fairness of the system. Also it will enable a more fertile ground for political discussion, as more information will be available. Finally, if the problem is rephrased as "companies effectively receiving state-support to exploit the planet", it will make the problem more urgent.
      - jogjayr 7y ago
        > One of the problems with (and arguments against) carbon taxing is that you'd have to apply it globally to maintain a level playing field. That's what tariffs are for.
        amelius 7y ago
        Yes, and they require proper accounting.
  - dnautics 7y ago
    Why not have an emissions permit auction? This demonstrably works well for NOx and SOx markets.
    - amelius 7y ago
      Wouldn't that stifle the market, since the auction will be won by a single big company or a few of them?
- pytester 7y ago
  They yield positive results they're just politically too easy to kill. The issue of climate change needs to be hit at by as many angles as possible - subsidies, investment programs, etc. We can't put all our faith in one tax.
- AngryData 7y ago
  Probably because you can easily get around any small scale carbon taxes by purchasing or operating key parts of your business that pollute heavily in another area and just ship it in. Carbon taxes are useless unless they apply equally to nearly everybody and give a level playing field.

Indeed. Many companies are affected by the environment, so this tax would serve to directly ensure a long-term cost is also a short-term cost, such that the market does not ignore it.

willis936 7y ago

I’ve been of this thinking for a while, but have read that small scale carbon tax tests have not yielded positive results. I still don’t understand how that could be, but I’m not a macroeconomics expert.

amelius 7y ago
Perhaps the best thing to do first is purely administrative: place a tax on carbon and immediately subsidize the companies so the net effect is zero. That way we buy some time to get accounting right and prevent a mass shock to the economic systems.
- smolder 7y ago
  We don't have time. A mass shock is inevitable. Deferring it makes it worse.
  - amelius 7y ago
    One of the problems with (and arguments against) carbon taxing is that you'd have to apply it globally to maintain a level playing field. Companies will not accept a carbon tax unless it is applied fairly. Having the accounting in place increases trust in the fairness of the system. Also it will enable a more fertile ground for political discussion, as more information will be available. Finally, if the problem is rephrased as "companies effectively receiving state-support to exploit the planet", it will make the problem more urgent.
    - jogjayr 7y ago
      > One of the problems with (and arguments against) carbon taxing is that you'd have to apply it globally to maintain a level playing field. That's what tariffs are for.
      - amelius 7y ago
        Yes, and they require proper accounting.
- dnautics 7y ago
  Why not have an emissions permit auction? This demonstrably works well for NOx and SOx markets.
  - amelius 7y ago
    Wouldn't that stifle the market, since the auction will be won by a single big company or a few of them?
pytester 7y ago
They yield positive results they're just politically too easy to kill. The issue of climate change needs to be hit at by as many angles as possible - subsidies, investment programs, etc. We can't put all our faith in one tax.
AngryData 7y ago
Probably because you can easily get around any small scale carbon taxes by purchasing or operating key parts of your business that pollute heavily in another area and just ship it in. Carbon taxes are useless unless they apply equally to nearly everybody and give a level playing field.