Discussion
  • Read More
    ReburnsABurningReturnsHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:48am

    And while people enjoy their little cheap gas tank fill-up, these ultra-low oil prices are actually fucking up the world economy in tangible ways.

    I wouldn’t highlight this fact as support for a carbon tax. Taxing a good tends to, other things being equal, reduce demand for that good.

    The more logical point to make is to acknowledge that yes, carbon taxes will in fact cause that “tangible harm” to become worse, but that the cost of the “tangible harm” is less than the cost of continuing to allow our energy sector to be dominated by unsustainable fuels.

    I’m not sure why so many environmentalists have to fabricate a narrative where “going green” won’t cause economic disruptions. I think doing that makes your average person, who has some dim notion of the fact that our energy sector is a yuuuuge part of our economy and that playing around with how it works will have ripple effects, not trust what you are saying on the whole. It is better to acknowledge those economic disruptions & argue that taking action is still worthwhile.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BobbySeriousReburnsABurningReturns
      2/02/16 10:58am

      I don’t think it’s a matter of denying some potential short term economic disruptions, but rather the feeling that those are irrelevant when compared with the catastrophic consequences of not addressing the effects of made climate change.

      Also, there’s no reason any disruptions can’t be offset by investments into renewable, alternative energy technologies. America has had the talent and the resources to create and control a technology revolution in this arena for decades.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BurneeezeBobbySerious
      2/02/16 11:10am

      That might be what you think, but that wasn’t the thrust of Hammy’s argument (and the line of argument OP described is very popular).

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Johnny ChundersHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:39am

    But if we don’t burn all of the oil, the dinosaurs will have died for nothing!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Rom RombertsJohnny Chunders
      2/02/16 10:42am

      “I’m dying in this bog so that one day a teen named Pax can drive his friends Brooklyn and Talon to the Chipotle two towns over because that’s the better Chipotle.”

      -All Dinosaurs, probably

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      gawkophileJohnny Chunders
      2/02/16 10:48am

      God wouldn’t have put them here if he didn’t want them to die and be burned. It is out duty to burn all of His gifts.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    DaMuttzNuttzHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:38am

    As someone who works in the field of both investment banking (with P3 infrastructure focurs) and carbon credits, this IS the time to apply a carbon tax. A 15 cent per gallon across the board nationally would be a great start, AS LONG AS the money is strictly used for the infrastructure fund and the fund’s “uses of funds” are identified clearly with as little government bureaucracy involved as possible.

    Don’t give me that it is a Progressive Tax either, people are saving money at the pump and wasting the proceeds on a larger latte than they usually get because they saved money. It’s not sexy, but those funds need to be applied to infrastructure, the foundation for long term economic growth.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ARP2DaMuttzNuttz
      2/02/16 10:50am

      Reinforcing that it needs to be a $ tax and not a percentage tax, which is part of the problem. 8% of $2.00 is much less than 8% of $4.00, but our roads are used just as much.

      [Ed: I’m aware federal taxes are fixed, but states are not]

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      sfltrack0000DaMuttzNuttz
      2/02/16 11:52am

      Yea, cause the working poor are going to spend all the money they save from cheap gas on larger lattes and not important things like food for their kids or diapers. Carbon taxes are progressive.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BeardHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:44am
    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      You might be wrong.Beard
      2/02/16 12:00pm

      The baseline in that chart indicates a dramatic increase in temperature, sunshine. An average increase of +0.22 degrees annually over eighteen years shows the temperature going up by over four degrees. Learn to math.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BeardYou might be wrong.
      2/02/16 12:29pm

      You’re kidding, right? Look at the trend line then find a junior high school science teacher to explain this to you.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    King_jaffe_jofferHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:38am

    We could fund our infrastructure for decades to come if there was a $3 floor on gas. Hell, we could fix all of our infrastructure, including electric, water, and fiber internet.

    It’s not going to happen. A man can dream though. A man can dream.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      FloodKing_jaffe_joffer
      2/02/16 10:42am

      I could see a nationally set price of $2 - 2.50 on gas but oil companies would cry socialism.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      SousedFlood
      2/02/16 10:48am

      Well, there’s always some sort of war on (Drugs, Terrorism, Same Sex Marriage) so declare petroleum as strategic war materiel and tax it accordingly.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Wayward ApologyHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:49am

    Even as a filthy commie tax and spend liberal I have to admit I hardly did a jig when I saw my property taxes go up 10% this year (I also didn’t contest it because fair is fair and my assessed value is still well below fair market value) so while I do not relish the idea of paying more money for gas if gas was $.50 more expensive tomorrow and you told me it was for a carbon tax I would shrug and be happy that I was still paying far less for gas than I was a two years ago.

    But how about instead of spending the money on more roads we invest it in sustainable energy and transportation projects instead of bigger and more roads. I know, I know, you are saying fix the existing roads and bridges but we all know if that much money is on the table the primary use will be expanding road infrastructure and not fixing existing infrastructure.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      IanWayward Apology
      2/02/16 11:17am

      A tax that would go towards a comprehensive national high-speed rail system would make me have an orgasm.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      NicoWayward Apology
      2/02/16 12:43pm

      Yea, if gas were 50 cents more tomorrow we'd still be paying less, but I'm not working under the assumption that gas prices will remain this low.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    FloodHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 10:39am

    Some would say you’re trying to tax their Constitutional right to own and drive the biggest SUV possible.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BobbySeriousFlood
      2/02/16 10:43am

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Sara-Slaughter607Hamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 1:09pm

    So, honest question re: People will use less gas

    Do you know ANYONE who uses ‘more gas’ than they normally would on a daily basis due to it being significantly cheaper?

    I don’t know a single person who alters their driving habits depending on gas prices.. I really don’t. I drive because I have to, and I fucking HATE driving in general so I don’t go anywhere unnecessary just for funsies.. there is a purpose.

    Like, what is that all about ? I don’t know anyone who would instantly trade in an SUV in favor of a Prius just cuz gas goes up over $3 a gallon again, do you? We have what we have, and we drive what we have to drive to live...

    I don’t know, perhaps it’s just because I don’t live in an area where public transportation is a realistic possibility in lieu of a car. It’s not.

    How many of you would seriously consider giving up your car in favor of a bus or bike if gas skyrockets again for whatever reason?

    I’ve just thought that notion couldn’t ever possibly make a remarkable difference in the grand scheme of things.

    And, I'm all about a carbon tax IF the money is actually allocated appropriate places, which we already fucking know it won't be. Sigh.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      DaMuttzNuttzSara-Slaughter607
      2/02/16 1:13pm

      The carbon tax in BC lead to a decrease in fuel consumption, while the rest of the country continued to grow their consumption. One of the best provinces in Canada for unemployment and GDP growth

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Sara-Slaughter607DaMuttzNuttz
      2/02/16 1:53pm

      I have no doubt that, statistically, it probably shows exactly this. I'm just saying I have never found gas prices to be a true factor in driving habits in my own particular experience and wondered just how prevalent it actually is for others.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Subtitles999Hamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 11:04am

    How about a tax on luxury goods instead? You know Fancy watches,designer clothes, premium cars, ect.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      You might be wrong.Subtitles999
      2/02/16 12:00pm

      Gas is a luxury good.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Misteaks were madeSubtitles999
      2/02/16 1:40pm

      Define a luxury car. I can option a Ford F150 to almost $60K. Does that make the most common pick up truck in the US a luxury vehicle?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    JoshDigiHamilton Nolan
    2/02/16 11:18am

    American drivers are the most spoiled babies on the planet. The taxes they pay don’t even come close to paying for the roads they use, never mind the billions in medical bills they cause in car accidents, the environmental destruction, the noise pollution, etc. Pay up for once.

    Reply
    <