Check out Greg Mankiw's article about the use of a carbon tax to limit pollution and the spread of global warming. Does this idea make sense to you?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Is a new tax the answer to Global warming?
Check out Greg Mankiw's article about the use of a carbon tax to limit pollution and the spread of global warming. Does this idea make sense to you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
This is nothing less than old Communist propaganda designed to screw the U.S. and its economy. The Kyoto treaty is one such example. Although we're one of the cleanest in terms of pollution v. product and have made greater strides in terms of decreasing carbon output, we're the country that would face a great impact.
As the article mentions, countries such as China, which are gross polluters, would be largely exempt. Sure, some European countries have decreased carbon output, but that is due to their economies taking a dive.
Indeed, ruining the U.S. economy was the only certain outcome of the Kyoto treaty - everyone admitted that it would be an abysmal failure in terms of making an impact on global warming. Sure, the local tree-hugger of hemp clothing and carbon neutral living may actually care about the environment, but at this level of national and international politics, it isn't about protecting the environment but rather the shifting of power to the left- to socialist and communist countries that are inefficient and incapable of competing.
I would challenge anyone to find a major environmentalist protest (not those that are simply a handful of patchoulli-smelling bongo players with a placard on a corner) that does not have a table where you can sign up for the Communist party. There's a reason why many environmentalists are called Watermelons - they're green on the outside, but red on the inside.
On a final note, speaking of carbon and all kinds of toxic emmisions.........for millions and millions of years, the Earth itself has been producing billions and billions of tons of noxious gasses from volcanoes. This is how the Earth was made. The Earth is still being transformed, as volcanoes still produce billions of tons gas a year. The amount of gasses produced by industrialized nations each year, while not insignificant, pales in comparison to what the Earth produces.
And yet, the Earth is still here. We are still here. How is this? Simple- the Earth is self cleaning. The sea, the atmosphere, and the weather all play a part in the clean up-it's been this way for millions of years, long before politicians and enviromentalists had gotten in on the act.
Wow, Brian had alot to say. My short snipit is basically this: We have some of the cleanest refiners on the planet, and we definetly pay through the nose for. Oil prices arnt high because there is a shortage, they are high because it is expesnive for company like Shell and Exxon to refine and produce the final product. And now, some leftist yahoo wants to tax us for it. No sir, i am not for that, we pay far high enough for petroleum based products. That is just the tip of the ice berg, other things than petroleum based proudcts are made in plants that create alot of carbon. practically every where. The resources it is costing us to argue this, should be put towards resource recycling and conservation and exploration into cleaner fuels and resources (ie...hyrogen, wind, NUCLEAR). Im a big fan of nuclear energy. nearly more effort is put into keeping those plants safely running that there is put into our national security. What ever, i think ive been watching too much simpsons.
I agree with Brian Liu one thousand percent. No, a new tax is not the answer to Global warming. Global warming, while worsened by Co2 given off by automobiles, is a constant cycle that is and will always occur and taxes will only increase government revenue and strain the American citizens.
This has to be one of the strangest ideas I have ever heard. I understand that pollution is a problem, but this pollution problems is not causing global warming - I have proof: I was backpacking this summer, let me reiterate that this summer - you know the season which is characterized by warm days and heaps of sun - and my tent froze along with several of my other belongings; thus proving that global warming is a joke - I want some greenies to explain that phenomena. Even if global warming were not the result of cyclic patterns - which scientific evidence verifies, a slight temperature increase in the Middle East will surely burn all the terrorist out of the region - I mean who can function at 130 degrees. Well, enough of that on to the meat of the article.
With all opinions about global warming aside, I think that introducing yet another tax will not only be unpopular, but unrealistic. I do not believe that the average American will vote to levy a tax to help fund more government projects.
Although it would be wise to help the environment simply for the sake of living in a better and cleaner world, I do not believe that a carbon tax is the best vehicle to do this. Unfortunately I do not have a magic solution to this problem.
While I disagree with the above boys about global warming itself, I do agree that a tax is probably not the answer, mainly because it would upset people. I think higher levels of carbon emissions should be blamed on us, though, not the planet. Of course our cars and factories are going to alter the natural rising and falling of carbon levels - the earth wasn't designed with those in mind. So with that in mind, I think a tax is a fair way of working on solving this, but it would probably make too many people angry to be really worth it. Like the article said, Americans don't like taxes!
It sort of mentions this in the Malthus chapter...it talks about how pollution is a cost of doing business and that manufacturers should be forced to absorb the usual costs plus the cost of pollution to society and that taxes on pollution are suggested to achieve this. When it's put that way, a tax makes sense.
I agree with kate in that Malthus makes the tax seem appropriate, but i also agree with him when he says that there isnt support to say that pollution is the cause of Global warming. There is not enough proof and for the slight increase that is occuring, could easily be from another reason, rather than pollution. However, as i flew into Houston this summer and saw the brown cloud hovering the city, I still definantly think that polution must be controlled soon. Whether a tax is the correct way or not, I don't know.
Well, I certainly agree that global warming is a problem, but maybe this is the wrong approach. Currently, there are no alternatives on the market other than gool 'ol gasoline, and making people pay through the nose for something they don't have too much of a choice on is a little rediculous to be honest.
Get some cars that run off hydrogen out on the market and then it would make more sense.
Interesting idea, and i'm all for the reduction of global warming. But how would the tax work excatly is confusing to me. How would the goverment know how much cardon dioxide you put into the air?
Taxes are not the answer to Global Warming. We causes it by driving cars everywhere. They are not worried about global warming but instead they are trying to make money.
A tax to help global warming? this just SOUNDS dumb. Global warming is not something that can be stopped by a tax, yes maybe we dont HELP it with our 304934 automobiles, but it is almost impossible to stop it.
It is hard for me to believe that any type of tax will solve anything for Americans. I do not believe that a tax on petroleum will help the global warming situation very much; instead it will just anger people. Although I cannot come up with an alternate solution, I still believe that a tax would only cause harm.
I definitely agree with Laura, any other tax other than the ton we already have to pay is only going to enrage Americans even more. Even if it does solve the global warming problem, everyone is still going to be mad that they have to pay another tax. A lot of people sadly really could care less about the future generations and whether global warming will affect them or not, and so a tax global warming will seem pointless to them. Therefore, having a tax to improve global warming will only make things worse.
Global warming must be stopped, but with a tax? Taxing on the amount of carbon dioxide that is used by Americans is absurd. That basically is implying that the government wants to tax the people for just living, since everyone uses some sort of CO2 product to substain a suitable life. Taxing is definetly the wrong answer to global warming.
Everyone uses carbon and it has no substitutes, so placing a tax on it isn't going to slow anything down at all. The government's well aware of it and they're just saying the tax is to slow it down because it sounds a little better than saying that they're just taking our money.
I think that global warming is a very big problem, but I don't think that imposing taxes would be the solution. The U.S. citizens would be outraged because all the prices will go up. The price of gasoline is high enough already, so why bring it up anymore.
no more taxes. im all for a clean environment, but i do not want more taxes.
I'm not that informed on global warming and I've never really worried about it. Sure the Earth has never had as much pollution as it does now or later in the future, but the fact is, is that no matter how hard we try there will always be pollution and we cant do anything about it. The Earth can clean itself just like it has for the past millions of years. Also, how do they know that pollution is the major factor in global warming, what if its because the Sun is growing and we are just that much closer to it? So maybe they should tax the Sun... ohh wait you cant, can you? Anyways these politicians only talk about stuff just to be in the news, because once one scientist scares the people we all want to vote for the one that will "fix" it, instead of worrying about things that matter, like our troops over seas.
i really dont think that a tax on Global warming is going to solve this problem. This issue cannot be solved with just a tax, we need to all do more at home and as individuals to stop this. the tax would only help to make more people angry.
Adding a new tax isn't going to anything for carbon emissions... It's just going to see to it that people pay even more at the pump, which they will
I do believe that global warming is a HUGE problem but I do not believe a tax will solve it. It MIGHT help but maybe not. One thing it will for sure do is make Americans angry and second how do they know it will acutllay reduce the amount of natural gas people are using? The only thing gas prices have been doing lately is rising and it never stops people from buying it. They don't like the rising prices and they gripe and complain but they still buy it so personally no this doesn't make sense at all to me.
The government does the same thing with other things like cigarettes. They place a tax on it and say it's to reduce its use, but they know that it won't change the demand. They aren't doing this hoping that it'll reduce pollution because they already know it won't; they're just taking an opportunity and making money off it.
the idea of taxing people because of global warming is crazy. Global warming is a problem and there needs to be a way to slow down the rate at which its occuring, but taxing is not the answe. All taxes will do is hurt the American citizens and make them mad. That is not the soultion, that is just creating another problem.
This is a very bizarre idea. A tax for pollution will not alleviate polluntion copletely. A tax will only anger the US cizitens. We need to find alternative routes in make the air cleaner to breathe. Before looking to taxes to solve problems...lets stop cutting down so many trees.
Post a Comment