6 ms·

The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions is some mixture of naive, shallow and sour grapes. There are a lot of wasteful industries

by cwkoss 5y ago

The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions is some mixture of naive, shallow and sour grapes. There are a lot of wasteful industries - crypto is a small slice of the overall pie and is arguably the most responsive to market forces. Make universally applied carbon taxes across all industries and let the market sort it out. I'm a crypto bull, and fully support greening our energy economy. Advocating taxing energy consumption based on use is a recipe for corrupt insider dealing and political favoritism.

whoknowswhat11 5y ago
Already happening. Crazy mandated ethanol blending. Hydrogen "superhighways" etc
pjc50 5y ago
> Make universally applied carbon taxes across all industries and let the market sort it out Globally?
- danuker 5y ago
  I'd apply the tax globally, but make it proportional to GDP/capita. A way to enforce this is tariffs.
  - tclancy 5y ago
    Both economically inefficient and unlikely to be agreed upon across countries. Perfect.
  - geysersam 5y ago
    Problem is, some people barely afford important things, while others easily affords unimportant things. Taxing everything at the same level will either: 1. Push millions of people into extreme poverty. 2. Or, be so low impact that it is ineffective for reducing carbon emissions. What's the solution? We should not tax all things equal. In a perfect market, a global carbon tax would be excellent. Unfortunately we do not live in (anything resembling) a perfect market.
- cwkoss 5y ago
  Ideally and eventually, but I have no qualms with the US implementing a carbon tax first to demonstrate leadership in this space.
foepys 5y ago
The problem with this is that poor people will not be able to keep their fridge powered if energy became too expensive.
- asdff 5y ago
  Western countries tend to subsidize the basic needs of the poor. I'm sure if it came to it and it became a big issue they would get some governmental aid just like with transit or foodstamps or housing or education or healthcare anything else that slips out of reach for the poor.
  - geysersam 5y ago
    If we are going to decide some carbon emissions more essential than others. Why not just exclude them from the carbon taxation to begin with?
    - asdff 5y ago
      Because wealthier groups and individuals can afford to pay taxes that impoverished people can't? There are all kinds of subsidies for the poor today where wealthier people pay a higher price. There is precedent here for that.
      - geysersam 5y ago
        > Because wealthier groups and individuals can afford to pay taxes that impoverished people can't? Yes, definitely. I could afford paying 50% tax on flights. Most people in the world could not pay 50% more for their transportation. The problem with a carbon tax is that it values all emissions equally. But on a global scale, some emissions are more essential than others. (Food, shelter, transportation to work etc)
        asdff 5y ago
        That's the benefit of it isn't it? Its supposed to force paradigm shifts in how we fuel our supply chain. It's supposed to not maximize profit in the near term. It's not good that our most basic needs are so reliant on greenhouse gas emissions and if we continue to subsidize the emissions of this market with our health and ecology nothing will ever change.
throwaway98211 5y ago
> There are a lot of wasteful industries So what? These whataboutisms add nothing to the conversation. People aren't going to stop caring about the carbon costs of crypto because other industries also suck. Think about it as an adoption blocker -- if your particular tech fetish can't address an issue that many, many people care about it is destined to be usurped by something that can. Would be awesome if the 'crypto bulls' would expend as much energy into ways to fix the carbon problem as they do arguing it doesn't matter.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
  Because we need a carbon tax. A carbon tax would be SO much more impactful for avoiding 2C and beyond than just a crypto tax.
joe_the_user 5y ago
There are a lot of wasteful industries - crypto is a small slice The difference between crypto and things like agriculture or transportation is obvious. People need food and transportation. If crypto was eliminated entirely tomorrow, on average, no one would suffer - some would lose relative wealth but others would gain relative wealth. Unlike conventional financial markets even, it's hard to argue crypto provides any kind of incentive for efficiency. Indeed, if crypto mining was punishingly taxed but crypto itself continued, almost no one would suffer, including most crypto holders.
- nprz 5y ago
  What about commercial cruise lines? Do people need to go on cruises? The cruise industry uses over double the emissions of the bitcoin protocol[0]. Furthermore, millions would be affected if bitcoin were to go offline tomorrow. Particularly people living in authoritarian states[1], or people who do not have access to traditional banking services. [0] https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1414065840157347840?s=21 https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1414065840157347840?s=2... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jul/31/out-of-control-and-rising-why-bitcoin-has-nigerias-government-in-a-panic https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jul/31/out-of-co...
  - lalaland1125 5y ago
    Most of the discussion about "eliminating" and/or taxing cryptocurrency are about trying to reduce the use of cryptocurrencies within developed countries where they are not needed. Nobody here is trying to stop people in authoritarian states from using crypto. Bringing up the authoritarian states is just a strawman.
    - nprz 5y ago
      What happens when those developed countries become authoritarian? Or starts printing trillions of dollars?
      - lalaland1125 5y ago
mlinksva 5y ago
Has "The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions" been proposed? I don't see it mentioned in the article discussed here. I wish the article had proposed that idea, it'd be more complete if it had -- it doesn't propose anything as far as I can tell. I agree that a general carbon tax would be better, and as a bonus, there's various progress toward just that around the world. But I'd find the argument you're making more compelling as a rebut to focus on cryptocurrency carbon footprint if the players in the cyrptocurrency industry were forcefully lobbying for general carbon taxes. Are there any examples of that?

by cwkoss 5y ago

whoknowswhat11 5y ago

Already happening. Crazy mandated ethanol blending. Hydrogen "superhighways" etc

pjc50 5y ago

> Make universally applied carbon taxes across all industries and let the market sort it out Globally?

danuker 5y ago
I'd apply the tax globally, but make it proportional to GDP/capita. A way to enforce this is tariffs.
- tclancy 5y ago
  Both economically inefficient and unlikely to be agreed upon across countries. Perfect.
- geysersam 5y ago
  Problem is, some people barely afford important things, while others easily affords unimportant things. Taxing everything at the same level will either: 1. Push millions of people into extreme poverty. 2. Or, be so low impact that it is ineffective for reducing carbon emissions. What's the solution? We should not tax all things equal. In a perfect market, a global carbon tax would be excellent. Unfortunately we do not live in (anything resembling) a perfect market.
cwkoss 5y ago
Ideally and eventually, but I have no qualms with the US implementing a carbon tax first to demonstrate leadership in this space.

foepys 5y ago

The problem with this is that poor people will not be able to keep their fridge powered if energy became too expensive.

asdff 5y ago
Western countries tend to subsidize the basic needs of the poor. I'm sure if it came to it and it became a big issue they would get some governmental aid just like with transit or foodstamps or housing or education or healthcare anything else that slips out of reach for the poor.
- geysersam 5y ago
  If we are going to decide some carbon emissions more essential than others. Why not just exclude them from the carbon taxation to begin with?
  - asdff 5y ago
    Because wealthier groups and individuals can afford to pay taxes that impoverished people can't? There are all kinds of subsidies for the poor today where wealthier people pay a higher price. There is precedent here for that.
    - geysersam 5y ago
      > Because wealthier groups and individuals can afford to pay taxes that impoverished people can't? Yes, definitely. I could afford paying 50% tax on flights. Most people in the world could not pay 50% more for their transportation. The problem with a carbon tax is that it values all emissions equally. But on a global scale, some emissions are more essential than others. (Food, shelter, transportation to work etc)
      - asdff 5y ago
        That's the benefit of it isn't it? Its supposed to force paradigm shifts in how we fuel our supply chain. It's supposed to not maximize profit in the near term. It's not good that our most basic needs are so reliant on greenhouse gas emissions and if we continue to subsidize the emissions of this market with our health and ecology nothing will ever change.

throwaway98211 5y ago

> There are a lot of wasteful industries So what? These whataboutisms add nothing to the conversation. People aren't going to stop caring about the carbon costs of crypto because other industries also suck. Think about it as an adoption blocker -- if your particular tech fetish can't address an issue that many, many people care about it is destined to be usurped by something that can. Would be awesome if the 'crypto bulls' would expend as much energy into ways to fix the carbon problem as they do arguing it doesn't matter.

X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
Because we need a carbon tax. A carbon tax would be SO much more impactful for avoiding 2C and beyond than just a crypto tax.

joe_the_user 5y ago

There are a lot of wasteful industries - crypto is a small slice The difference between crypto and things like agriculture or transportation is obvious. People need food and transportation. If crypto was eliminated entirely tomorrow, on average, no one would suffer - some would lose relative wealth but others would gain relative wealth. Unlike conventional financial markets even, it's hard to argue crypto provides any kind of incentive for efficiency. Indeed, if crypto mining was punishingly taxed but crypto itself continued, almost no one would suffer, including most crypto holders.

nprz 5y ago
What about commercial cruise lines? Do people need to go on cruises? The cruise industry uses over double the emissions of the bitcoin protocol[0]. Furthermore, millions would be affected if bitcoin were to go offline tomorrow. Particularly people living in authoritarian states[1], or people who do not have access to traditional banking services. [0] https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1414065840157347840?s=21 https://twitter.com/gladstein/status/1414065840157347840?s=2... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jul/31/out-of-control-and-rising-why-bitcoin-has-nigerias-government-in-a-panic https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jul/31/out-of-co...
- lalaland1125 5y ago
  Most of the discussion about "eliminating" and/or taxing cryptocurrency are about trying to reduce the use of cryptocurrencies within developed countries where they are not needed. Nobody here is trying to stop people in authoritarian states from using crypto. Bringing up the authoritarian states is just a strawman.
  - nprz 5y ago
    What happens when those developed countries become authoritarian? Or starts printing trillions of dollars?
    - lalaland1125 5y ago

mlinksva 5y ago

Has "The idea of taxing cryptocurrencies specifically for carbon emissions" been proposed? I don't see it mentioned in the article discussed here. I wish the article had proposed that idea, it'd be more complete if it had -- it doesn't propose anything as far as I can tell. I agree that a general carbon tax would be better, and as a bonus, there's various progress toward just that around the world. But I'd find the argument you're making more compelling as a rebut to focus on cryptocurrency carbon footprint if the players in the cyrptocurrency industry were forcefully lobbying for general carbon taxes. Are there any examples of that?