Bipartisan Group of Economists Endorses (Surprisingly Robust) Carbon Tax

[Threegoofs]

Unless one can switch to renewables then that is simply an "on paper" advantage. Our (rented) single-wide mobile home is 100% electric and we have one possible electric utility provider. Our vehicle (2002 Tahoe) is 5.3L IC powered and serves as a tow vehicle. Replacing that tow vehicle with a hybrid is impossible and going to a (much newer) flex fuel vehicle is not going to be cost effective.

Yep. Sucks for you.

The point of this isn’t how to make you money, the point is that the new trailer park might consider gas hookups, or getting solar or wind.

You might want the rest of us to subsidize your carbon footprint, but it’s not gonna happen.

Unfortunately, the ‘**** you, I got mine’ attitude is why we are in this position in the first place.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Now wait a minute. You liked Threegoofs' post right before yours where he laid out an example of exactly how a revenue-neutral carbon fee-and-dividend system can work. You did read it, right?

Yes, I "liked" his providing a link to an allegedly similar system. That link also noted that only a (not specified) portion of the carbon tax revenue was returned to the people via a rebate and used the income tax system to do so.

 

[apdst]

Yep. Sucks for you.

The point of this isn’t how to make you money, the point is that the new trailer park might consider gas hookups, or getting solar or wind.

You might want the rest of us to subsidize your carbon footprint, but it’s not gonna happen.

Unfortunately, the ‘**** you, I got mine’ attitude is why we are in this position in the first place.

IOW, the folks who can afford the expensive as hell transition to wind/solar get a break and those who can't get butt ****ed.

 

[Mach]

Wow, who knew you could do all that just by levying a tax? Why has no one ever tried it before?

We've been doing it since the invention of taxes, what are you talking about?

Almost the entirety of the United States roads, and law and order and military and education systems, are just a few of the things funded by levying taxes.
Why would you think pollution reduction would be some big new thing?

Meanwhile, as gas prices go up, many fans of this tax will blame Republicans.

Who cares, start talking sense and doing the right thing, maybe politics will follow your lead.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yep. Sucks for you.

The point of this isn’t how to make you money, the point is that the new trailer park might consider gas hookups, or getting solar or wind.

You might want the rest of us to subsidize your carbon footprint, but it’s not gonna happen.

Unfortunately, the ‘**** you, I got mine’ attitude is why we are in this position in the first place.

That (bolded above) is precisely my point. Most stories about a carbon tax try rather desperately to hide that fact by pretending that offsets, in the form of rebates, will make this oh so painless. You are at least being more honest and admit that regular folks, like me, are going to be net losers under such a scheme in order to potentially "save the planet" someday in the distant future.

 

[Harshaw]

We've been doing it since the invention of taxes, what are you talking about?

I'm talking about all these things you say this tax is going to do.

If it's that easy and there's all this history of taxes, why are there still these problems?

Are you following yet?

Who cares, start talking sense and doing the right thing, maybe politics will follow your lead.

What are you even talking about?

 

[Phys251]

Yes, I "liked" his providing a link to an allegedly similar system. That link also noted that only a (not specified) portion of the carbon tax revenue was returned to the people via a rebate and used the income tax system to do so.

Ah. I'd be perfectly fine with a 100% return, spread equally among all adult citizens. Maybe give some of the credits back to parents as well.

 

[Phys251]

Unless one can switch to renewables then that is simply an "on paper" advantage. Our (rented) single-wide mobile home is 100% electric and we have one possible electric utility provider. Our vehicle (2002 Tahoe) is 5.3L IC powered and serves as a tow vehicle. Replacing that tow vehicle with a hybrid is impossible and going to a (much newer) flex fuel vehicle is not going to be cost effective.

That's exactly why we need fee-and-dividend: to make green switches more cost-effective so that a lot more people will make them.

 

[Threegoofs]

IOW, the folks who can afford the expensive as hell transition to wind/solar get a break and those who can't get butt ****ed.

Well, no.

But you’re refractory to explanations, so I won’t bother to explain.

 

[Threegoofs]

That (bolded above) is precisely my point. Most stories about a carbon tax try rather desperately to hide that fact by pretending that offsets, in the form of rebates, will make this oh so painless. You are at least being more honest and admit that regular folks, like me, are going to be net losers under such a scheme in order to potentially "save the planet" someday in the distant future.

No- you’ll be a net winner, because eventually you’ll get the option to have energy from renewable sources, and be able to take advantage of the tax credit since you can find ways to minimize carbon use.

And all of this will help mitigate AGW, which can really be devastating to you because it’s linked to the ability of the economy to grow and contribute to your prosperity.

Your alternative is to save a little money, clutch your gas guzzling SUV so you can tow all that important stuff, and watch the world deteriorate over the next few decades because everyone with the attitude of ‘**** you, I got mine’ will burn it all to the ground.

This isn’t really exaggeration- the effects are being seen right now, and clearly will get worse over the next few decades.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax | Canada | UNFCCC

Intersting quote from the article.

"The tax is estimated to have reduced emissions in the province by up to 15% from what they would have otherwise been (Murray and Rivers, 2015). The same research also indicates that the tax has had negligible effects on overall economic performance. Between 2007 and 2014, B.C’s. real GDP grew 12.4%, stronger than the Canadian average.

The ‘West Coast Clean Economy: 2010-2014 Jobs Update’ notes that B.C. has 68,165 clean economy jobs, a 12.5% increase since 2010.

In B.C.’s cleantech sector, approximately 200 firms generate an estimated $C 1.7 billion in revenue."

Also that even federal agencies under Donald Trump acknowledge manmade global warming and its devastating effects.

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

https://science2017.globalchange.gov/

https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

So the debate between the left and the right shouldn't be about taking or not taking action on climate change but instead about what types of actions should be taken. There you also can have some actions with bipartisan support like for example a carbon tax.

 

[apdst]

Well, no.

But you’re refractory to explanations, so I won’t bother to explain.

You won't explain, because you can't put enough lipstick on this pig to make it look like anything other than a pig.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Local Republican politicians are also starting to see the benefits of renewable energy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshua...n-leaders-love-renewable-energy/#631e530f3da7

Two thirds of American also give priority to developing alternative energy sources, like solar and wind power. Two thirds of Americans also wanted US to stay in the Paris accord.

Most in US say alternative energy takes priority over fossil fuels

https://www.theatlantic.com/science...upport-staying-in-the-paris-agreement/528663/

Also that Denmark, that have a right wing goverment, got 43 percent of their electricity from wind power in 2017 and also plan to get 80 percent of electricity from renewables in 2020.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/06/44-wind-denmark-smashed-already-huge-wind-energy-records-2017/