And unless we also seriously reduce our consumption of energy. Especially we, the rich, who can well afford to do that. Green technology alone is not enough.
I hope you're right. But when you lead with a headline like Carbon Extraction Works!, you need to back up this spectacular claim with something more than a secondhand report of a corporate press release. This kind of clickbaiting is a disservice to the climate and to your own credibility.
Yes. Here's my new favorite slogan: Good enough is the new perfect.
The answer to those questions is: The fees collected (from both a domestic carbon tax and a carbon tariff on imports) should be delivered equally to all residents of the country in question as a carbon dividend. The dividend will more than offset the losses incurred by consumers who have to pay higher prices for the things they need to buy. It will make the whole scheme a progressive rather than a regressive tax. The dividends are an essential part of this scheme for any one who cares about climate justice – or, for that matter, even about the political viability of policies like this.
The answer to the question in your headline is: both. A growing economy – one that is set up so that it has to grow or perish – is a cancer.
A new idea to me; sounds promising at first glance. Obviously, some key questions are:
* How is "land value" assessed?
* Who does the assessing (since certainly there will be judgment calls involved)?
* How is "land value taxing" different from property taxes, a common way of collecting local revenues in the US, which are based on the assessed market value of the property?
* And most important: What's the evidence, or at least the arguments, that support the claim that land value taxing would lower housing costs and reduce income disparities?
If "degrowth, carbon taxes, reduced consumption, veganism, cessation of burning stuff, transition, simplicity, population reduction, and more" are all "bullshit" ideas that "will not and cannot work" , why isn't "get a new job" also bullshit that will not and cannot work?
We need critical and constructive deliberations about what proposed solutions will and won't actually work, because we're facing a huge and unprecedented situation, and we all need to do all we can to make sense of it.
But this "everybody's solutions except my favorite one are bullshit" is the worst kind of self-serving, click-baiting bullshit. We who care about the fate of the earth need to step out of the circular firing squad.
Good idea.
But here you are, giving the troll more attention by writing yet another article about him.
And - oh, wait - here I am, giving him still more attention by responding to this article (rather than to the many articles on "the many issues far more deserving of our attention").
What is it that is so compelling about all this?
Oh, dear.
Brent and everybody else here, how 'bout we pause and take a deep breath?
This dialogue is very worth having, and the passionate intensity is fine. But maybe just taking a step back, noticing and accepting our hurt feelings and entrenched positions, might open up some space and improve the light-to-heat ratio of these conversations.
