As tens of of thousands of people take fossil fueled trips to the fossil fuels supplying nation of Dubai, the Warmist elites, who’ll be taking lots of private fossil fueled jets which will have to be deadheaded to other airports, are back to pushing taxes
‘Tax the bad’ to boost climate finance, COP28 panel advises
Increasing taxes on polluting activities and cutting fossil fuel subsidies could generate trillions of dollars to tackle climate change, an advisory panel to the COP28 talks in Dubai said.
Summit host the United Arab Emirates, a major oil producer, has said the two-week meeting starting on Thursday must deliver “tangible action” on climate funding, which has been squeezed by rising debt burdens, faltering political will and patchy efforts by private finance.
Higher carbon taxes – including levies on emissions from the maritime and aviation sectors – should be among options COP28 studies, the panel recommended.
“We see a big potential, particularly from taxing the bad internationally and using that money to generate predictable resources,” panel member Amar Bhattacharya of the Brookings’ Center for Sustainable Development told a briefing.
In economics, taxing the bad refers to levies that target harm to the public good – for example, greenhouse gases – as a way to raise revenues and discourage the activity.
How can those things be “bad” when so few Warmists have given up using them in their own lives? Do the peasant level Warmists understand that cheering for carbon taxes will mean a higher cost of living in their own lives? If you increase the cost of, saying maritime shipping, the price of goods will go up. I’ll stop, because you’re smart enough to understand how this works.
There are growing calls for a carbon levy on shipping, which transports around 90% of world trade and accounts for nearly 3% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions.
It would be ugly.
Investments in the fossil-fuel economy continued to outstrip those made in the clean economy, it said. Subsidies for fossil fuels totalled $1.3 trillion, and substantially more if counting the societal cost of dealing with emissions and pollution.
Yeah, those of who aren’t nuts and inventing bullshit manners of economics do not count the societal cost.
Aviation, which accounts for some 2-3% of emissions, is not directly covered by the Paris Agreement but the air transport sector has pledged to align itself with its goals.
I suggest a big tax on private jets that cost more than $10 million. And better, anyone worth at least $1 million will have to pay a huge tax for every flight they take. People like Al Gore are good with that, right?
Still looking for a private jet charter to COP28?https://t.co/R8RSTLP7fB
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 28, 2023
It’s so very easy for the elites to push taxes as a way to fight
global warmingclimate change, because they can easily afford them. The majority of people? Not so much.Now that we know the Government can just create as much money as they want from thin air, there is no reason for anyone to pay taxes. Democrats see taxes as a way to reward and punish people to get them to do what they want. It should only be used to generate revenues.
I’ve been wondering about this for quite some time. If the government can print money anytime it wants why on earth are they taxing us for ours?
Of course, the real answer is that they cannot just create money from thin air. When they do, they increase the money supply and that is the cause of inflation. Do it too much and you create massive misery for your population. The US economy is so massive, that our government thinks they can get away with large increases to the money supply every year. And mostly, they are right. As long as they don’t go too far, the inflation is not noticeable. The last half of Trump and all of Biden administrations broke the mold on this. The US government also borrows money, but for the most part, no one will loan us the huge amounts of money our government needs to stay afloat. So the Federal Reserve creates it out of thin air and “loans” that to the government. When governments do this too much and too often, you get the Weimar Republic. Inflation is ALWAYS a policy choice by the government in power, not something that just happens.
Q: Does the US Federal Reserve also cause global inflation?
Of course, the causes of inflation are not simple.
The great but late Milton Friedman said “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”.
And from the IMF:
Professor Friedman and the IMF are talking about chronic, core inflation. Not the bumps and peaks.
…the key phrase long-term inflation
Most bumps of inflation in recent US history are of a couple years duration.
In the 1974 bout (12.2%) global food prices shot up due to failed crops in the US and globally. Also, OPEC QUADRUPLED the cost of crude oil and the Nixon wage and price control experiment was ended.
The late 70s inflation was caused by food (meat!!) and oil shocks (Iran!) AND an increase in mortgage rates! Technically, economists argue that increases in mortgage rates RESULT from inflation and are not the cause but the CPI includes mortgage payments as a component.
That is not to say that the current bout of Bidenflation was not influenced by government spending and looser (loser?) monetary policy. After all, the nation (and world) was trying to recover from the pandemic. The various spending “rescue” bills signed by Trump and Biden put cash in the hands of out of work Americans who spent it. But from the peak in mid-2022 the inflation rate continues to drop. A shortage of housing has caused housing prices to rise (exacerbated by increased fed rate). Mortgage rates are now decreasing.
Other significant factors have been crude oil prices, supply chain issues, tight labor market following Covid pandemic that led to wage increases and food price increases.
In 1923 during peak inflation in the Weimar Republic “a loaf of bread in Berlin that cost around 160 Marks at the end of 1922 cost 200,000,000,000 Marks by late 1923”. That’s about a 12 million % increase in one year. Current inflation rate in the US is about 3.2%. I think we’ll be OK.
Our esteemed host erred:
That’s just it: the elites and the politicians think that most people aren’t smart enough to understand that taxes and fees and all other expenses get pushed down to the end consumers of their products. That’s why politicians are always calling upon corporations to pay their “fair share” of taxes, because they know that most people aren’t smart enough or educated enough to understand that consumers are paying those taxes, not corporations. If businesses did not pass those taxes along to their customers, the businesses would lose money and go out of business.
Mr Teach asks: How can those things (e.g., air travel etc) be “bad” when so few Warmists have given up using them in their own lives?
How can those things (e.g., trillions in gov spending, Social Security, Medicare etc) be “bad” when so few conservatives have given up using them in their own lives?
Mr “Saul Alinsky” Teach uses Rules 4 and 5 ad libitum to troll libs!
As is almost always the case, the crux is the impact of taxes on the super wealthy. The fear has been that governments would attempt to recoup the costs from global warming by taxing the sources.
The model for this was the tobacco industry, nearly taxed out of existence.
If it becomes more expensive to ship from China than to manufacture in the US, manufacturing here will become more “economic”, which is good for American workers and entrepreneurs but not so good for entrenched corporations relying on cheap Asian labor.
For the American far-right (SciDs) the most facilitative path is to 1) deny warming 2) deny there’s any cost to global warming 3) deny there’s anything to do about it.
Perhaps Rimjob could provide proof of AGW first.
But he can’t.
Wonder why. (Brihg on the ad homs.)
MyLilStalker knows there is no proof of AGW only overwhelming evidence supporting the concept.
Is MLS calling for a moratorium on ad hominem attacks? OK, by me.
So Rimjob if AGW is just an unprovable “concept” (your term), how does one ascribe a “real” cost to “it”?
So, MyLilStalker, as you well know, scientific theories are not provable.
Once the hypothesis is proposed to explain the observations, it is tested in such a way to invalidate or formally falsify it. Also, scientists explore other potential explanations for the observations.
The theory of CO2-induced global warming, that is, CO2 added to the atmosphere will cause the atmosphere to warm, is supported by evidence. It’s a fact that CO2 absorbs infrared radiation and re-emits it up, down and sideways. It’s a fact that The increased CO2 came from (and is still coming from) the burning of fossil fuels. Oh, and it’s a fact that the Earth is warming, even though some have taken to denying that fact once again.
Do you not want a moratorium on name-calling?
So Rimjob, are you now saying AGW is a provable fact?
That’s different from what you wrote before.
MyLilStalker,
Anthropogenic global warming (human-generated CO2 is causing the current bout of warming) is a theory.
Warming is a fact. CO2 absorbing infrared radiation is a fact. The increased CO2 coming from fossil fuel burning is a fact.
There you did it again, Rimjob.
AGW is not a provable fact ergo CO2 cannot be the cause of something unprovable.
Keep tripping over your dick, chubby.
The cost in fuel to ship 1 40foot container is about 100 dollars. Teach how many sound boards. Can fit into that container. How much would doubling the shipping cost. Raise the price you pay?
3000 40 foot containers per ship
3 million dollars fuel cost. Trans Pacific.
Al Gore can easily pay that tax. Dems are always trying to get the rich to pay more. It was Trump and the GOP Congress that gave them the 2 trillion dollar permanent tax cut
That airplane tax how would the Messiah Trump feel about that ?
Carbon boy-have proof of the “Trump 2 trillion dollar permanent tax cuts”?
If you keep repeating a lie, it doesn’t make it true.And when the Dems had the Presidency and Congress, they only raised the top tax rate by 2%. So do you have proof they’re “always trying to get the rich to pay more”? And anyway, the “rich” do pay more-top 1% pays about 40% of all federal income taxes. So Carbon boy, as usual, what the hell are you talking about?
Did you try googling it yourself
02/28/2018
Rodgers
Politico.com
POLITICO Analysis:
At 2.3 Trillion cost Trumps tax cuts leave big gap
USAToday.com
May 30 2023
jl when you are too lazy to check yourself you risk getting your nose rubbed in it
BrieAna Frank
Yes I did, Carbon boy, as I have done in the past. First of all the trillion dollar cost includes all tax brackets plus corporate taxes, so you were wrong on that, and second, the personal tax cuts expire in 2025, so you were wrong on that. Other than that..good job! Where the hell do you look stuff up?
[…] it all here… and again, yes, you should as we all know when you start raising taxes on one thing, […]
Trump was very proud of that tax cut
jl I am surprised you have forgotten it!
He should be proud of it. And your point is…….?
The big cost in marine shipping are the port fees. The fuel cost is about 100$ per container. If there was a 100% fuel tax levied it would add very very little to the overall cost .