2 ms·
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm very worried about climate change, and I would be willing to make any number of sacrifices to _effectively_ combat climate
by hairofadog 5y ago
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm very worried about climate change, and I would be willing to make any number of sacrifices to _effectively_ combat climate change. However, the question is this:
> _Suppose a proposal was on the ballot next year to add a monthly fee to consumers’ monthly electricity bill to combat climate change. If this proposal passes, it would cost your household $10 every month. Would you vote in favor of this monthly fee to combat climate change, or would you vote against this monthly fee?_
My utility company can barely run their billing website. Paying them $40 a month to "combat climate change" sounds like throwing money into a hole. So no, I wouldn't do that.
Would I vote for legislation that would redirect subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy sources? Yes! Would I vote for legislation that would place limitations on the production of plastics, even if it meant raising the price of consumer goods? Probably!
I know, I know, there's complexity in these issues, but my point is that I'd be willing to pay more to combat climate change. I'm just picky about who I'm paying it to, whether the costs will be distributed justly, and what they plan to do with that money.
- xyzzyz 5y ago> Would I vote for legislation that would redirect subsidies from fossil fuels to clean energy sources? FWIW, there are actually fewer "subsidies" to fossil fuels that could actually be redirected than most people here think. When you read HN articles and comments on the "fossil fuel subsidies", in my experience the bulk of these is "fossil fuel has this and that externality, and users of fossil fuels don't have to pay for it, so we count it as a subsidy". Whether you agree that this actually counts as subsidy or not, it's not like you can redirect it.
- avmich 5y agoBut in terms of monetary subsidies - don't fossil companies still get more, in percentage points to their revenue, than green companies? This is something which can be easily redirected.