3 ms·

In theory, this sounds fine, in practice it hurts the poor the most again. Musk and Bezos can build solar panels on their huge properties and offset their othe

In theory, this sounds fine, in practice it hurts the poor the most again. Musk and Bezos can build solar panels on their huge properties and offset their other CO2 production (the way we do with "coupons" now). But what will little below-average bobby in some cold rural area do, if the only way to heat his small rural cottage is a wood-burning stove? Pay more tax to people like musk, who now generate negative CO2? Look at electric heating for example, a resistive heater is ~15eur over here, while a heat pump is around 1k eur with installation. If you want to be even more efficient, you build better insulation and a ventilation system with a heat exchanger. But hey, if you're poor, living in an overly expesive rental apartment, you don't have that money, but you do have 15eur for a space heater and suddenly a higher tax bill.

tonyedgecombe 2y ago
It doesn’t hurt the poor very much because the poor aren’t consuming much. It’s the rich that are responsible for most emissions.
ceejayoz 2y ago
Use a wealth tax to pay for housing energy efficiency improvements. I got our roof, windows, doors, water heater and AC done via an no-interest state program of this nature.
mrob 2y ago
The poor are responsible for below average CO2 emissions, so they stand to benefit from redistributed carbon tax. Wood burning has its own problems, especially in urban areas, but its carbon emissions are net zero, and should be taxed as such. If the rich build enough solar panels to offset their emissions (which considering the figures presented in the article seems unlikely) then the tax is working as intended. Incentives against resistive heating increase demand for alternatives, which increases competition to supply those alternatives and drives down price.
fallingsquirrel 2y ago
A resistive heater just uses electricity, it doesn't emit CO2. So the user won't be taxed. The power company might be taxed, depending how that electricity was produced.
- ajsnigrutin 2y ago
  And that power companies co2 tax will be paid by whom?
  - fallingsquirrel 2y ago
    The same people who pay their payroll tax. Should we abolish payroll taxes too because some customers are poor?
    - ajsnigrutin 2y ago
      But you have to earn more to pay more payroll tax and you still take home more than before. At least in my country, people on minimum wage pay almost zero income tax. Some people can barely afford heating already, and we're making it even more expensive for them, while people like musk/bezos can just avoid it, or even earn money on co2 coupons. If you suggeted banning private jets, bot for the rich and the poor, then sure, that would affect bezos a lot more than bobby below-average over here, but not this.

tonyedgecombe 2y ago

It doesn’t hurt the poor very much because the poor aren’t consuming much. It’s the rich that are responsible for most emissions.

ceejayoz 2y ago

Use a wealth tax to pay for housing energy efficiency improvements. I got our roof, windows, doors, water heater and AC done via an no-interest state program of this nature.

mrob 2y ago

The poor are responsible for below average CO2 emissions, so they stand to benefit from redistributed carbon tax. Wood burning has its own problems, especially in urban areas, but its carbon emissions are net zero, and should be taxed as such. If the rich build enough solar panels to offset their emissions (which considering the figures presented in the article seems unlikely) then the tax is working as intended. Incentives against resistive heating increase demand for alternatives, which increases competition to supply those alternatives and drives down price.

fallingsquirrel 2y ago

A resistive heater just uses electricity, it doesn't emit CO2. So the user won't be taxed. The power company might be taxed, depending how that electricity was produced.

ajsnigrutin 2y ago
And that power companies co2 tax will be paid by whom?
- fallingsquirrel 2y ago
  The same people who pay their payroll tax. Should we abolish payroll taxes too because some customers are poor?
  - ajsnigrutin 2y ago
    But you have to earn more to pay more payroll tax and you still take home more than before. At least in my country, people on minimum wage pay almost zero income tax. Some people can barely afford heating already, and we're making it even more expensive for them, while people like musk/bezos can just avoid it, or even earn money on co2 coupons. If you suggeted banning private jets, bot for the rich and the poor, then sure, that would affect bezos a lot more than bobby below-average over here, but not this.