3 ms·
The system you describe is the government. The government would tax it and then redistribute the revenue to the communities of those affected, if that’s what we
by jolux 6y ago
The system you describe is the government. The government would tax it and then redistribute the revenue to the communities of those affected, if that’s what we decided was most important. The state is the mechanism through which groups of individuals take action in public.
- mschuster91 6y ago> The government would tax it and then redistribute the revenue to the communities of those affected, if that’s what we decided was most important. That's also problematic because CO2 acts globally - and you don't really want to give dictatorships of poor countries who are affected the most (e.g. Africa) a steady supply of money.
- jolux 6y agoI was talking purely about domestic policy, just to clarify. In the US people in the southeast are most immediately affected by global warming, in the form of severe storms (incidentally states in the southeast are also already among the greatest recipients of federal aid, because of their high levels of poverty). On an international level there will need to be economic cooperation as well but it will look different because there isn’t a single sovereign to collect and distribute revenue. Typically such solutions focus on agreements to reduce tariffs in international trade provided certain conditions and such.