4 ms·

>I don't get that? If do adopt a carbon tax, then the rich guy who wants to drive a performance car pays a lot more, than the poor person who take the bus. But

>I don't get that? If do adopt a carbon tax, then the rich guy who wants to drive a performance car pays a lot more, than the poor person who take the bus. But the poor guy with a beat 20 year old car in a badly insulated rental pays more than the rich guy with his Tesla and energy neutral villa.

kortilla 5y ago
Good, do we care about the planet or cheap access to highly emitting vehicles.
- CorrectHorseBat 5y ago
  Why not tax the rich more and use that money to help the poor emit less?
  - kortilla 5y ago
    That doesn’t work. As long as the cheap option is available that’s what people will use. Unless you’re suggesting we tax the cheap option, in which case you’re saying the same thing.
    - CorrectHorseBat 5y ago
      I'm suggesting we tax the luxurious option and use that money to improve the cheap option.
  - eru 5y ago
    Eh, that's what eg income taxes are for. If you want to do redistribution to help the poor, the impact of the overall tax system is important. You don't need to make every single tax progressive. Individual taxes, especially sin taxes, should be designed to do their job as efficiently as possible.
- jachee 5y ago
  “Who cares about all those poors, right?”
  - kortilla 5y ago
    “Who cares about climate change when it means I’ll have to take the bus or apply for some electric car subsidy, right?”
    - eru 5y ago
      Please don't argue in favour of electric car subsidies (or any other subsidies). That's just needless paperwork, and never catches all use cases. Eg the guy who walks doesn't get an electric car subsidy. Or the guy who practices hypermiling on his ICE, vs the guy who drives his ICE like a maniac. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermiling Much easier to just apply an emission tax (or a cap-and-trade program) and let people figure it out by themselves without extra paperwork and government favouritism.

kortilla 5y ago

Good, do we care about the planet or cheap access to highly emitting vehicles.

CorrectHorseBat 5y ago
Why not tax the rich more and use that money to help the poor emit less?
- kortilla 5y ago
  That doesn’t work. As long as the cheap option is available that’s what people will use. Unless you’re suggesting we tax the cheap option, in which case you’re saying the same thing.
  - CorrectHorseBat 5y ago
    I'm suggesting we tax the luxurious option and use that money to improve the cheap option.
- eru 5y ago
  Eh, that's what eg income taxes are for. If you want to do redistribution to help the poor, the impact of the overall tax system is important. You don't need to make every single tax progressive. Individual taxes, especially sin taxes, should be designed to do their job as efficiently as possible.
jachee 5y ago
“Who cares about all those poors, right?”
- kortilla 5y ago
  “Who cares about climate change when it means I’ll have to take the bus or apply for some electric car subsidy, right?”
  - eru 5y ago
    Please don't argue in favour of electric car subsidies (or any other subsidies). That's just needless paperwork, and never catches all use cases. Eg the guy who walks doesn't get an electric car subsidy. Or the guy who practices hypermiling on his ICE, vs the guy who drives his ICE like a maniac. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermiling Much easier to just apply an emission tax (or a cap-and-trade program) and let people figure it out by themselves without extra paperwork and government favouritism.