Until we get a Carbon Tax, we haven't even started - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15043858
"The IMF reiterates what economists have long understood: Enacting a carbon tax is “the single most powerful and efficient tool”

"The plan would help low-income households and place a higher burden on the upper-income bracket. There could also be money for essential research and development to aid the energy transition."

"The science does not change because politicians deny that humans are warming the planet. Likewise the economics do not change because politicians find them ideologically or politically inconvenient."

Europeans like to say that Americans are children. They are not wrong.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html
#15043869
Pants-of-dog wrote:What do you think needs to be done about climate change?


Nothing can be done about climate change until the biggest offenders like China are bought into a program. The problem with China (and we got a good idea with the National Basketball Association) is companies profiting from doing business in China are afraid to take a stance. So yea they just don't care enough.

How much in taxes do you think should come out of your income. There's not much left now as it is, how much more taxes should we pay so corrupt politicians can profit and live like rock stars?
#15043872
Finfinder wrote:
1) Nothing can be done about climate change until the biggest offenders like China are bought into a program.


2) How much...



1) Awww, you've fallen and you can't get up. Which is ethically accurate. Yes, we can.

2) What we need is an incrementing Carbon Tax, at least 10 cents a year (on a gallon of gas). Most proposals call for revenue neutrality, which means your overall change would be zero...

However, a Carbon Tax is one of the few taxes you don't have to pay. There are alternative sources, you can reduce by using something like a Prius. You can even ride a bike. Before I retired, I went to work on a bicycle occasionally.

Btw, China is expanding it's use of alternatives. If you want more, we need another agreement like Paris, but one that's more binding.

Of course, what you want are excuses.
#15043877
late wrote:1) Awww, you've fallen and you can't get up. Which is ethically accurate. Yes, we can.

2) What we need is an incrementing Carbon Tax, at least 10 cents a year (on a gallon of gas). Most proposals call for revenue neutrality, which means your overall change would be zero...

However, a Carbon Tax is one of the few taxes you don't have to pay. There are alternative sources, you can reduce by using something like a Prius. You can even ride a bike. Before I retired, I went to work on a bicycle occasionally.

Btw, China is expanding it's use of alternatives. If you want more, we need another agreement like Paris, but one that's more binding.

Of course, what you want are excuses.



Gee such effort for me to open my wallet and pay more taxes you are so convincing. :lol: We need more agreements where the USA primarily funds international corruption... I don't think so. Enough is enough we already pay too much taxes.

So you are afraid of China ?
#15043884
Adding a "carbon tax" on gasoline hurts the middle and lower classes more. It is a very bad idea.
Ask President Macron how that went for him.

Those green boys always want to tax extra stuff.
Fuck them.
#15043888
There is a middle road. Everyone gets an energy allowance and the price of energy over that allowance is increased to pay for it and the transition.

We are in interesting times as low carbon energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels and so with the right policy we can reduce emissions and cut energy prices in the long run.
#15043889
late wrote:"The plan would help low-income households and place a higher burden on the upper-income bracket. There could also be money for essential research and development to aid the energy transition."


To be precise: Low-income households benefit if the tax revenue is returned to households in equal dividends.

See page 14-18 in the report:
https://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publi ... ashx?la=en
#15043893
Better work subsidies, shows China, then taxes

I am not sure if the global warming theory is correct, this winter should be cold due to less sun activity.

The sun activity could also explain the global warming.

BUT

If it gets to hot and the methane brakes out of the permafrost, then we will see the death of all beings with lungs
#15043894
Finfinder wrote:Nothing can be done about climate change until the biggest offenders like China are bought into a program. The problem with China (and we got a good idea with the National Basketball Association) is companies profiting from doing business in China are afraid to take a stance. So yea they just don't care enough.


So your plan is to do nothing and blame the Chinese.

How will that help?

How much in taxes do you think should come out of your income. There's not much left now as it is, how much more taxes should we pay so corrupt politicians can profit and live like rock stars?


As a Marxist, I have no trouble paying taxes, and as a democratic Marxist, I would not elect politicians who waste money like that.

Now, in those places where a carbon tax has been instituted, how much has it raised taxes, and have the politicians been doing drugs and sleeping with young women?
#15043908
Rugoz wrote:To be precise: Low-income households benefit if the tax revenue is returned to households in equal dividends.


Even if low-income households get back more than they pay it's still a regressive tax. It still places most of the burden on the working and middle classes. It doesn't just put the burden on the working and middle classes directly, they also get hit when the taxes are passed on to them in the form of higher prices for everything that requires carbon energy to make and transport which is just about every good, commodity, and service under the sun.

You gotta appreciate the irony here, "progressives" are shifting the burden off of the 1%, the people who own the carbon economy and have taken the lion's share of the profits from it, by insisting that working people must submit to highly regressive carbon taxes. :lol: :knife:
#15043911
Sivad wrote:
Even if low-income households get back more than they pay it's still a regressive tax.



You're missing the obvious here.

The revenue from the indirect taxation would also get passed back. Not rocket science.

But I would like to see means testing, a sliding scale.
#15043914
late wrote:"The IMF reiterates what economists have long understood: Enacting a carbon tax is “the single most powerful and efficient tool”


To do what? :knife:

Carbon pricing is just about the weakest, most inefficient, ineffective means imaginable of addressing climate change. If the globalist oligarchs really believed they had a problem and they were really as desperate as they claim they are to solve it there is no way they'd be dicking around with carbon taxes.

If this world that they own and the rest of us are just living in was really facing the kind of existential threat they claim climate change poses they'd have trillion dollar energy r&d projects going that would dwarf the moonshot and the Manhattan Project combined. The fact that they don't tells me that the globalist oligarchs really don't believe any of this shit and that it's all just a great big fucking scam.
#15043919
That is some pretty ridiculous stuff.

Even if these people had reports that would undo their industries, you wouldn't know about them anyway. But that is not the worst thing here. This logic does not stand up to any test. You should not be measuring the impact we are having on the environment and its effects on your presumptions about the behaviour of oil magnates. Neither they, nor their behaviour, nor their reports have any weight on the reality of the impact we are having on the environment. We are having a truly monumental impact with garbage, plastic and emissions and it is clearly unsustainable.

On topic,
The huge majority of the price of fuel is tax anyway.
#15043929
Pants-of-dog wrote:So your plan is to do nothing and blame the Chinese.

How will that help?



As a Marxist, I have no trouble paying taxes, and as a democratic Marxist, I would not elect politicians who waste money like that.

Now, in those places where a carbon tax has been instituted, how much has it raised taxes, and have the politicians been doing drugs and sleeping with young women?


I'm not interested in a scam to transfer wealth and power and tax the middle class.
#15043956
Sivad wrote:


Carbon pricing is just about the weakest, most inefficient, ineffective means imaginable of addressing climate change.



Actually, it's the only real way to start the transition.

"If you want to change behavior, change the price."

Your anger comes from your awareness that it would be effective, and you don't want that.

I am not aware of anything more efficient, but I could use the laugh, tell us what's more efficient.
#15043957
BeesKnee5 wrote:
There is a middle road. Everyone gets an energy allowance and the price of energy over that allowance is increased to pay for it and the transition.

We are in interesting times as low carbon energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels and so with the right policy we can reduce emissions and cut energy prices in the long run.



Administrative nightmare..

But it might be doable if it applies to direct energy use only. I'd like to see means testing on that. There really isn't a point to reducing the tax for millionaires and billionaires.

The Carbon Tax was devised to let market forces do their magic. The more of an allowance you have, the more you are slowing the process. You see, the tax would be incremental. So your allowance would slow the process unacceptably, or the rate of taxation would have to be higher to meet the emissions targets.

Not saying it can't be done (assuming allowances are administratively practical) but that it may not have the effect you are looking to get.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14

1)The income gap is a poor method to assess pov[…]

All governments will exert coercion via the socia[…]

Ukrainegate

1) Fiction. Read the oath.. An oath doesn't chan[…]

I am no capitalist, but are you claiming that ad[…]