To: mojito
As I've said here before; B.C.'s Carbon Tax among the least bad things that government's do to "fight global warming". (There can be no "good" solutions to a problem that does not exist.)
As the article points out, the tax was designed to be "revenue neutral" -- other taxes were cut by an amount equal to the amount collected by the carbon tax. The leftists, and greens wanted the tax to be earmarked for "green energy" projects -- which would have resulted in a lot of waste. Our (nominally) right-wing "Liberal Party" government insisted that the money go to general revenue, and be used to reduce other taxes.
I say "least bad"; because there are many worse ways for governments to intervene: cap and trade; bans on light bulbs, etc.; CAFE standards for vehicles; subsidies for "green energy" industries; etc. This particular carbon tax is the least bad, because it does the least to distort the market; and because the revenues are used to reduce other taxes.
We are likely to get a socialist (NDP) government after the next provincial election. Soon after, I expect that the revenues from the carbon tax will be used for "green energy", and general taxes will rise sharply. In that event; the carbon tax will become just plain "bad" -- perhaps one of the worst government interventions.
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
We are likely to get a socialist (NDP) government after the next provincial election. Why? Haven't things been getting better under Harper or is that the reason?
A carbon tax has one advantage: It is effectively a sales tax that is easier and less invasive to collect but for one use I can think of: How do they collect a carbon tax from people who heat their homes with wood?
19 posted on
07/05/2012 11:23:40 AM PDT by
Carry_Okie
(The Slave Party: advancing indenture since 1787.)
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
This particular carbon tax is the least bad, because it does the least to distort the market; and because the revenues are used to reduce other taxes.???
You do realize that every last penny of "carbon taxes" is ultimately passed on to consumers to pay, through higher energy costs and higher prices for goods that require energy to produce and put on the shelves (ie., everything)?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson