4 ms·

I really wish the government would just let me make my own decisions about how I spend my money... If I want to buy a car that gets bad mileage and an inefficie

I really wish the government would just let me make my own decisions about how I spend my money... If I want to buy a car that gets bad mileage and an inefficient computer, let me do that. Just make me pay for the negative externalities of that. Maybe make some optional "energy efficient" certification so if people want to, they can buy a more efficient computer.

FractalHQ 5y ago
It might be your money but it’s not your planet- we have to share an atmosphere after all. The negative externalities effect us all, and you can’t really buy a spare ozone layer.
- GhostVII 5y ago
  That's why I think people should pay for their negative externalities - it doesn't matter if someone emits a tonne of CO2 if they pay enough to fund more clean energy (for example). Some kind of cap and trade system would allow us to specify exactly how much emissions we are OK with each year, and let's people who want to emit more do so if they pay for it.
  - b0tzzzzzzman 5y ago
    I have seen many different factories, running many processes. The main thought I always have is, how much power is being consumed here? They have 100s of 500w to 1000w lights alone. It is not the end consumer running consumer grade PCs who is killing the planet. How much energy, toxic byproducts, and external third party impacts are being produced to make any electronics? Micro$oft preeches about the planet, yet just made so much hardware obsolete with the Draconian Win11 plan. List goes on and on..
  - gregable 5y ago
    Unfortunately it's never that easy. Should you be able to blast music at high volume outdoors if you pay a nuisance tax? If your wood burning stove heater makes the nearby aqi shoot up, is that ok if you pay for someone else to upgrade to a efficient furnace? What about embedded manufacturing energy? Should the government not only tax CO2 within it's borders but also somehow audit CO2 for the entire supply chain? If not, some nation will make the call that fossil fuel burning is an externality that they can avoid paying. Let's also admit that none of us can build an computer or a car from raw materials. Even if you would pay a premium for an efficient machine, most consumers don't understand what the future energy costs to them are going to be, will not demand efficiency, and thus suppliers will not build it. Apartments are rarely well insulated because the renters are rarely willing to pay more in rent to save more on energy costs. As much as we'd like everyone to make rational decisions about complex transactions, most people will not. Im not arguing for stupidity even. At the level of the individual, the savings available by analyzing the options are smaller than the cost of the analysis. Its not worth much of my research time save $1 / yr in extra power efficiency. But across an industry it is.
cratermoon 5y ago
> just let me make my own decisions about how I spend my money So, only people with money get to make their own decisions? Poor people have no self-determination? Why is that?
- rowanG077 5y ago
  What? Poor people are free their spend the money the way they like too.
- GhostVII 5y ago
  Generally government regulations like this are going to make things more expensive, not less. So these types of regulations actually give poor people fewer options. For example, the Dodge Journey was not available in California in 2020 due to emissions regulations. This is objectively worse for poor people, since it gives them fewer options. If taxing negative externalities causes significant cost to people who can't afford it, I'm all for subsidizing some amount of that though.
- ItsMonkk 5y ago
  Tax externalities and then return that money averaged out over everyone as a dividend, see [0] for an example. Therefore instituting the tax will lead to an immediate boost to those who already use less electricity, like poor people. But everyone has the same incentive for using less. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend

FractalHQ 5y ago

It might be your money but it’s not your planet- we have to share an atmosphere after all. The negative externalities effect us all, and you can’t really buy a spare ozone layer.

GhostVII 5y ago
That's why I think people should pay for their negative externalities - it doesn't matter if someone emits a tonne of CO2 if they pay enough to fund more clean energy (for example). Some kind of cap and trade system would allow us to specify exactly how much emissions we are OK with each year, and let's people who want to emit more do so if they pay for it.
- b0tzzzzzzman 5y ago
  I have seen many different factories, running many processes. The main thought I always have is, how much power is being consumed here? They have 100s of 500w to 1000w lights alone. It is not the end consumer running consumer grade PCs who is killing the planet. How much energy, toxic byproducts, and external third party impacts are being produced to make any electronics? Micro$oft preeches about the planet, yet just made so much hardware obsolete with the Draconian Win11 plan. List goes on and on..
- gregable 5y ago
  Unfortunately it's never that easy. Should you be able to blast music at high volume outdoors if you pay a nuisance tax? If your wood burning stove heater makes the nearby aqi shoot up, is that ok if you pay for someone else to upgrade to a efficient furnace? What about embedded manufacturing energy? Should the government not only tax CO2 within it's borders but also somehow audit CO2 for the entire supply chain? If not, some nation will make the call that fossil fuel burning is an externality that they can avoid paying. Let's also admit that none of us can build an computer or a car from raw materials. Even if you would pay a premium for an efficient machine, most consumers don't understand what the future energy costs to them are going to be, will not demand efficiency, and thus suppliers will not build it. Apartments are rarely well insulated because the renters are rarely willing to pay more in rent to save more on energy costs. As much as we'd like everyone to make rational decisions about complex transactions, most people will not. Im not arguing for stupidity even. At the level of the individual, the savings available by analyzing the options are smaller than the cost of the analysis. Its not worth much of my research time save $1 / yr in extra power efficiency. But across an industry it is.

cratermoon 5y ago

> just let me make my own decisions about how I spend my money So, only people with money get to make their own decisions? Poor people have no self-determination? Why is that?

rowanG077 5y ago
What? Poor people are free their spend the money the way they like too.
GhostVII 5y ago
Generally government regulations like this are going to make things more expensive, not less. So these types of regulations actually give poor people fewer options. For example, the Dodge Journey was not available in California in 2020 due to emissions regulations. This is objectively worse for poor people, since it gives them fewer options. If taxing negative externalities causes significant cost to people who can't afford it, I'm all for subsidizing some amount of that though.
ItsMonkk 5y ago
Tax externalities and then return that money averaged out over everyone as a dividend, see [0] for an example. Therefore instituting the tax will lead to an immediate boost to those who already use less electricity, like poor people. But everyone has the same incentive for using less. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend