3 ms·

Just stop subsidizing flying, maybe even tax the fuel a fraction of the value it’s destroying and I bet most of flying will suddenly turn out to actually be com

Just stop subsidizing flying, maybe even tax the fuel a fraction of the value it’s destroying and I bet most of flying will suddenly turn out to actually be completely avoidable.

ChrisMarshallNY 2mo ago
I think advances in remote work tech have had a huge impact on business travel. Zoom beats Boom.
- mlrtime 2mo ago
  Zoom is also probably the worst software I'm forced to use. The UI and fat client are from 2000.
shrubby 2mo ago
Yup. Make the flyers pay the infrastructure costs based on the environmental effects. It's not too complicated.
- tim333 2mo ago
  It is a bit complicated as flying isn't much subsidised in cash terms and if you put large taxes on fuel, flights will divert to nearby countries with less tax. In the UK there is air passenger duty which is for example £102 per passenger on economy seats to the US. I think they are reluctant to raise it too much incase business shifts elsewhere.
  - shrubby 2mo ago
    We're afraid of the zillionaire tantrums, thus this should be a coordinated effort. I'm seeing it from both sides of the isles that people are being fed up with the overlords. But currently the zillionaire tantrums control the future so you're right.
dbspin 2mo ago
Insane take - this is just ensuring that the only people who get to enjoy travel are the rich. Nothing in our society is improved by taking a privilege that's widely enjoyed and restricting it to the wealthy or very wealthy.
- beepbooptheory 2mo ago
  Why is it still considered a 'privilege' if everyone should absolutely be able to use it?
- port11 2mo ago
  It’s a privilege with most externalities _not_ taken into account, i.e. it’s hurting us all because we ignore its true cost and make it available in vast quantities. Since the global South will suffer the most from climate change, they might disagree with developed nations ‘subsiding’ flights.
  - dbspin 2mo ago
    The phrase the global south elides the fact that those countries are far higher in inequality than the West. Wealthy elites being the only ones able to travel isn't a solution to climate change, it's a recipe for a degree of social control we haven't seen in a century. We can fight climate change, and increase mobility, standard of living and freedom for all. There is an enormous amount of low hanging fruit here - from switching to renewables, to moving militaries off gas and oil, to switching cargo ships to renewable energy. Trapping humanity in their nation of birth shouldn't be the go to first step. The consequences of that degree of social control aren't being allowed for here.
    - port11 2mo ago
      I agree with all your points, except that 1) people can travel through other means, and 2) people can travel less. I have plenty of acquaintances that could do with a bit of discovering theirs and nearby countries by train, and perhaps fly half as much as they do (6-10 return flights per year for mini beach vacations).

Just stop subsidizing flying, maybe even tax the fuel a fraction of the value it’s destroying and I bet most of flying will suddenly turn out to actually be completely avoidable.

ChrisMarshallNY 2mo ago

I think advances in remote work tech have had a huge impact on business travel. Zoom beats Boom.

mlrtime 2mo ago
Zoom is also probably the worst software I'm forced to use. The UI and fat client are from 2000.

shrubby 2mo ago

Yup. Make the flyers pay the infrastructure costs based on the environmental effects. It's not too complicated.

tim333 2mo ago
It is a bit complicated as flying isn't much subsidised in cash terms and if you put large taxes on fuel, flights will divert to nearby countries with less tax. In the UK there is air passenger duty which is for example £102 per passenger on economy seats to the US. I think they are reluctant to raise it too much incase business shifts elsewhere.
- shrubby 2mo ago
  We're afraid of the zillionaire tantrums, thus this should be a coordinated effort. I'm seeing it from both sides of the isles that people are being fed up with the overlords. But currently the zillionaire tantrums control the future so you're right.

dbspin 2mo ago

Insane take - this is just ensuring that the only people who get to enjoy travel are the rich. Nothing in our society is improved by taking a privilege that's widely enjoyed and restricting it to the wealthy or very wealthy.

beepbooptheory 2mo ago
Why is it still considered a 'privilege' if everyone should absolutely be able to use it?
port11 2mo ago
It’s a privilege with most externalities _not_ taken into account, i.e. it’s hurting us all because we ignore its true cost and make it available in vast quantities. Since the global South will suffer the most from climate change, they might disagree with developed nations ‘subsiding’ flights.
- dbspin 2mo ago
  The phrase the global south elides the fact that those countries are far higher in inequality than the West. Wealthy elites being the only ones able to travel isn't a solution to climate change, it's a recipe for a degree of social control we haven't seen in a century. We can fight climate change, and increase mobility, standard of living and freedom for all. There is an enormous amount of low hanging fruit here - from switching to renewables, to moving militaries off gas and oil, to switching cargo ships to renewable energy. Trapping humanity in their nation of birth shouldn't be the go to first step. The consequences of that degree of social control aren't being allowed for here.
  - port11 2mo ago
    I agree with all your points, except that 1) people can travel through other means, and 2) people can travel less. I have plenty of acquaintances that could do with a bit of discovering theirs and nearby countries by train, and perhaps fly half as much as they do (6-10 return flights per year for mini beach vacations).