General / Off-Topic a republican proposal to climate change solution

[znôrt]

i just watched this: https://www.ted.com/talks/ted_halstead_a_climate_solution_where_all_sides_can_win

it sounds simple and revolutionary enough. however there's something i still don't get, and since this is a regular off-topic here i'm really interested on your opinions.

my question is this: so we translate tax burden directly to consumer dividends which pleases everyone but ... how is this an incentive to adopt renewable? let's say the tax is at some point high enough to push some business to switch off carbon (or even consumers if you think, for instance, transportation). but this will also result in a net decrease in taxes, ergo also dividends ... which by the very same principle will be highly unpopular, thus working against dropping fossil fuel. am i the only one who thinks this scheme shoots itself in the foot? what am i missing?

if i were to be suspicious, with the current regulation out of the way (part of the plan) this could rapidly become a much worse situation where we simply have shifted the responsibility for climate change on the invisible hand. starts to look like a trojan horse. scary enough!

 

[NascentChemist]

I'm suspicious of his plan.

I think we do need a carbon tax. I agree that the free market cannot adequately account for the externality of carbon pollution. His plan to give the money right back and to have a border adjustment tax doesn't make a lot of sense. The money made from a carbon tax should be used to subsidize renewable energy and fund climate remediation.

What can't happen is carbon tax dollars going into some general fund or local regulatory agencies. The latter is what California did with our Cap and Trade. The money isn't really being used to deal with carbon pollution.

And the adjustment tax is silly. In his example, Country A would be the one paying the tax! It's the same with Trump's border adjustment tax. American consumers would foot the bill, not Mexico.

 

[Adept]

Give me a text version if you want feedback. I don't want to listen to him prattle on after hearing the first 5 minutes.

 

[CMDR Heisenberg B. Damned]

if i were to be suspicious, with the current regulation out of the way (part of the plan) this could rapidly become a much worse situation where we simply have shifted the responsibility for climate change on the invisible hand. starts to look like a trojan horse. scary enough!

Pretty much this, here have this money to ignore how much carbon we're pumping into the atmosphere, let us get rid of all that pesky regulation oh and we're passing the cost of this onto the customers so give us that money back.

In fact really it's the other way round, charge the customers more for carbon heavy gas(oline) then slice off some of the extra profits to give to the public to appease them.

On first viewing it doesn't even look like competent slight of hand. As so often with modern day politics it's like the crappiest ever pick pocket frantically waving their hand in front your face whilst ineptly searching our trouser pockets for change to steal. Amazingly it still appears to work far too often.

 

[znôrt]

Give me a text version if you want feedback. I don't want to listen to him prattle on after hearing the first 5 minutes.

https://www.ted.com/talks/ted_halst...here_all_sides_can_win/transcript?language=en
well, it's a transcript, not an abstract.

tl;dr: ever increasing tax rate on carbon which is paid off as dividend directly to citizen. this system would supersede current regulation. because of the net benefit to citizen, a single country adopting this would start a domino effect.

 

[NascentChemist]

https://www.ted.com/talks/ted_halst...here_all_sides_can_win/transcript?language=en
well, it's a transcript, not an abstract.

tl;dr: ever increasing tax rate on carbon which is paid off as dividend directly to citizen. this system would supersede current regulation. because of the net benefit to citizen, a single country adopting this would start a domino effect.

I doubt there would be a domino effect or any net benefit to citizens. The main drivers of carbon pollution are fossil fuel power plants, certain industrial products (cement and fertilizers) and consumer transport.

Anyone who uses electricity, eats food, or drives would end up paying the carbon tax. Even if the corporations are the ones directly taxed, they will pass those costs onto the consumer. And what are people going to do with the dividend? Either ignore their own carbon footprint or buy a bigger car.

Instead, the revenue from a carbon tax should be used mediate sources of carbon. Either more renewables or retro-fits for fossil fuel burning plants.

The border adjustment tax won't cause a domino effect. It would only drive up prices for consumers in carbon-taxed states.