4 ms·

It's not about wanting to pay more, it's about wanting to stop causing damage that future generations will have to pay for. Young people in the western world to

It's not about wanting to pay more, it's about wanting to stop causing damage that future generations will have to pay for. Young people in the western world today are quick to (accurately) accuse older generations of severely messing up the environment (as well as housing markets, government budgets, etc.) to enrich themselves at the expense of future generations. Given that, I don't think it's that crazy to expect those same young people to pay for the negative externalities their own activities create instead of just paying it forward. The poll cited in the article I linked explicitly mentioned that the revenue would be used for policies to support greenhouse gas reduction. I'm skeptical that the respondents cared that much about how the money would get spent, since the vast majority did support policies that would tax the wealthy and/or companies that produce greenhouse gas emissions - the only difference is where they perceive the money to be coming from, not how it would be spent.

GhettoComputers 5y ago
>It's not about wanting to pay more, it's about wanting to stop causing damage that future generations will have to pay for. Is that what the common price sensitive citizen cares about? >Given that, I don't think it's that crazy to expect those same young people to pay for the negative externalities their own activities create instead of just paying it forward. You don't think young people are capable of being hypocrites? Statistics such as low savings is proof that long term planning isn't deeply embedded. Survey data is notoriously unreliable, on a if the rich subsidizes itself it would be circular wealth, but coming from them means that they are adversely affected. Policies and their actual effect are also not the same, would they not care when government trust is low and its possible to use the money to subsidize large companies that use a green label to play metric? I know the idea of carbon neutral is simply ofsetting carbon negatives to other companies, transportation is a huge contributor and globalized companies play with numbers to call themselves carbon neutral. https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/30/carbon-neutrality-google-sustainability-lead-robin-bass/ https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/30/carbon-neutrality-google-s... BTW thanks for showing me that substack, I subscribed, hope is sorely needed today.

GhettoComputers 5y ago

>It's not about wanting to pay more, it's about wanting to stop causing damage that future generations will have to pay for. Is that what the common price sensitive citizen cares about? >Given that, I don't think it's that crazy to expect those same young people to pay for the negative externalities their own activities create instead of just paying it forward. You don't think young people are capable of being hypocrites? Statistics such as low savings is proof that long term planning isn't deeply embedded. Survey data is notoriously unreliable, on a if the rich subsidizes itself it would be circular wealth, but coming from them means that they are adversely affected. Policies and their actual effect are also not the same, would they not care when government trust is low and its possible to use the money to subsidize large companies that use a green label to play metric? I know the idea of carbon neutral is simply ofsetting carbon negatives to other companies, transportation is a huge contributor and globalized companies play with numbers to call themselves carbon neutral. https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/30/carbon-neutrality-google-sustainability-lead-robin-bass/ https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/30/carbon-neutrality-google-s... BTW thanks for showing me that substack, I subscribed, hope is sorely needed today.