>Neither of those requires unsustainable energy production.
Being able to fuel up your SUV without having to spend $10/gal does. The average HN user making $150k/year salary might be able to absorb such a bump in fuel price, but not the average american.
>> We're going to [do thing to fix problem] and make [maligned entity] pay for it!
>Got other ideas to address externalities? Or are you just like all libertarians going to pretend they don’t exist until it’s too late and nothing can be done about it?
The part I'm making fun of isn't "tax carbon to internalize externalities". The part I'm making fun of is the thought that you can do it without making the end-consumer pay for it.
>Sucks to be gas-fueled SUV owner. Or are you saying that’s some inherent requirement of human life?
Posting on HN from a computer isn't a "requirement of human life" either. Why are you wasting electricity (presumably from a carbon emitting source) to post on HN?
>Are you seeing ghosts? Who made a statement like that?
"No, I want government to reduce profits of those who benefit off destroying the environment and use that money to subsidize environmentally friendly produce for consumers who wouldn’t be able to afford it."
A carbon tax wouldn't come out of the profits of companies. It'll get passed on entirely to consumers.
Being able to fuel up your SUV without having to spend $10/gal does. The average HN user making $150k/year salary might be able to absorb such a bump in fuel price, but not the average american.
>> We're going to [do thing to fix problem] and make [maligned entity] pay for it!
>Got other ideas to address externalities? Or are you just like all libertarians going to pretend they don’t exist until it’s too late and nothing can be done about it?
The part I'm making fun of isn't "tax carbon to internalize externalities". The part I'm making fun of is the thought that you can do it without making the end-consumer pay for it.