A Harvard scientist hired by the U.N. suggests that taxes are the solution to stopping the end of the world from global warming. He says we ought to tax the United States nations that emit CO2. Uh. I like the Canadian guy's idea about leveraging UFO technology better. How about you?
Assume, for the sake of argument, that human CO2 emission does exacerbate global warming, that global warming does threaten long-term survival, and that reducing CO2 emissions would have measurably improve the situation. Given those assumptions, what solutions would you propose that you believe would substantially reduce CO2 emissions without involving some sort of punitive tax?
And snark aside, you're really talking about taxing not just the United States, but the industrialized world. The US is #1 in CO2 production (despite being way down the list in population). China is #2, and I believe India is #3. I'd oppose any such tax that exempts China, India, and/or Europe. And, of course, any such tax should have its proceeds directed solely toward development of renewable energy generation (wind, solar, wave, hydro, etc.). Let's not make the cigarette tax mistake again.
Posted by: tgirsch | March 15, 2007 at 17:08