6 ms·

Why not just impose a massive carbon tax and carbon import duties? This would essentially accomplish all of your goals without war (which is a TERRIBLE idea, wa

Why not just impose a massive carbon tax and carbon import duties? This would essentially accomplish all of your goals without war (which is a TERRIBLE idea, war is VERY energy intensive and extremely wasteful, never mind the untold suffering placed upon the low-income, poor soldiers and civilizations who will die unnecessarily).

ianleeclark 7y ago
> Why not just impose a massive carbon tax and carbon import duties? This would essentially accomplish all of your goals without war This is going to be the most cynical possible of takes, but I just don't see how this is politically viable in a place like the United States. The government is gridlocked and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the United States military is a massive CO2 emitter, so this would likely drive the dual deficits into even more dangerous territory because, let's face it, we're not going to demilitarize in any meaningful way.
throwaway1777 7y ago
Increases in gas taxes were the reason for the Gilets Jaunes protests in France, so raising taxes could lead to war in itself. Also broad scale carbon taxes will likely impact the poor more than the rich.
- aaronblohowiak 7y ago
  The nice thing about carbon taxes is that they raise revenue. You can then redistribute this revenue out to people to further address income inequality, or at least offset the regressive nature of consumption taxes.
  - throwaway1777 7y ago
    So tax people and then give the money back? I thought the point of carbon taxes was to fund green tech like solar and electric cars?
    - aaronblohowiak 7y ago
      If you tax carbon, the invisible hand of the market will incentivize creation of greener alternatives. Much cheaper to administer and less likely to have crony capitalism than subsidies.
    - WhompingWindows 7y ago
      The point of carbon taxes is to price the negative externality of carbon emissions. Since we aren't allowed to dump nuclear waste or human refuse in public parks, why should we get to dump GHG's and child-asthma-gasses into the air for free? What is done with the revenue from the carbon tax? That's up to the policy, it could be revenue neutral w/ a progressive rebate that helps the poor, or the revenue could be used to support EV chargers, renewables, efficiency upgrades, it's all up to the policy makers. In WA, USA, they tried to pass a carbon tax, but it failed because some moderates/GOP wanted revenue neutral w/ taxpayer rebates, whereas the left wanted climate equity and green-new-deal-type policies. So, there is real, carbon-tax-killing debate over what to do with revenues.
- ZeroGravitas 7y ago
  Carbon taxes, even if "flat" (i.e. a set amount per carbon) are "progressive" taxes because the rich spend more on carbon generating stuff. It is of course easy to tweak them to make them even better, like directing some of the money to subsidize public transport.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway1777 7y ago
    Citation? I would bet as a percentage of income the rich do not spend as much on carbon generating stuff. Most taxes on consumption are regressive unless they are on luxuries that the poor can’t afford.
    - ZeroGravitas 7y ago
      https://medium.com/@dolanecon/would-a-carbon-tax-really-hurt-the-poor-a1b0d7c019cf https://medium.com/@dolanecon/would-a-carbon-tax-really-hurt... I think the basic intuition is that to make luxury product X involves lots of poor people using carbon. If you only count the direct expenditures then it looks worse for poor people, if you trace each purchase back to its carbon then it affects the people who buy lots of stuff.
      - reitzensteinm 7y ago
        This link does not support the claim that carbon taxes are progressive.
- sempron64 7y ago
  Increases in gas taxes were also the reason for the currently ongoing unrest in Iran and Lebanon. Populations are very sensitive to this cost, and it quickly leads to unmanageable inflation.

ianleeclark 7y ago

> Why not just impose a massive carbon tax and carbon import duties? This would essentially accomplish all of your goals without war This is going to be the most cynical possible of takes, but I just don't see how this is politically viable in a place like the United States. The government is gridlocked and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the United States military is a massive CO2 emitter, so this would likely drive the dual deficits into even more dangerous territory because, let's face it, we're not going to demilitarize in any meaningful way.

throwaway1777 7y ago

Increases in gas taxes were the reason for the Gilets Jaunes protests in France, so raising taxes could lead to war in itself. Also broad scale carbon taxes will likely impact the poor more than the rich.

aaronblohowiak 7y ago
The nice thing about carbon taxes is that they raise revenue. You can then redistribute this revenue out to people to further address income inequality, or at least offset the regressive nature of consumption taxes.
- throwaway1777 7y ago
  So tax people and then give the money back? I thought the point of carbon taxes was to fund green tech like solar and electric cars?
  - aaronblohowiak 7y ago
    If you tax carbon, the invisible hand of the market will incentivize creation of greener alternatives. Much cheaper to administer and less likely to have crony capitalism than subsidies.
  - WhompingWindows 7y ago
    The point of carbon taxes is to price the negative externality of carbon emissions. Since we aren't allowed to dump nuclear waste or human refuse in public parks, why should we get to dump GHG's and child-asthma-gasses into the air for free? What is done with the revenue from the carbon tax? That's up to the policy, it could be revenue neutral w/ a progressive rebate that helps the poor, or the revenue could be used to support EV chargers, renewables, efficiency upgrades, it's all up to the policy makers. In WA, USA, they tried to pass a carbon tax, but it failed because some moderates/GOP wanted revenue neutral w/ taxpayer rebates, whereas the left wanted climate equity and green-new-deal-type policies. So, there is real, carbon-tax-killing debate over what to do with revenues.
ZeroGravitas 7y ago
Carbon taxes, even if "flat" (i.e. a set amount per carbon) are "progressive" taxes because the rich spend more on carbon generating stuff. It is of course easy to tweak them to make them even better, like directing some of the money to subsidize public transport.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway1777 7y ago
  Citation? I would bet as a percentage of income the rich do not spend as much on carbon generating stuff. Most taxes on consumption are regressive unless they are on luxuries that the poor can’t afford.
  - ZeroGravitas 7y ago
    https://medium.com/@dolanecon/would-a-carbon-tax-really-hurt-the-poor-a1b0d7c019cf https://medium.com/@dolanecon/would-a-carbon-tax-really-hurt... I think the basic intuition is that to make luxury product X involves lots of poor people using carbon. If you only count the direct expenditures then it looks worse for poor people, if you trace each purchase back to its carbon then it affects the people who buy lots of stuff.
    - reitzensteinm 7y ago
      This link does not support the claim that carbon taxes are progressive.
sempron64 7y ago
Increases in gas taxes were also the reason for the currently ongoing unrest in Iran and Lebanon. Populations are very sensitive to this cost, and it quickly leads to unmanageable inflation.