←back to thread

196 points triceratops | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
K0nserv ◴[] No.45109548[source]
The US, like most democracies, is worse at long term planning. It needs robust incentives to counteract short term instincts.

A $100/ton carbon tax would raise $490b(based on 4.9 billion tons of co2 emissions[0]) per year that could be distributed to lower income households (to offset the effect, making the tax progressive) and be used to fund green energy investment.

0: https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states

replies(8): >>45109553 #>>45109663 #>>45109896 #>>45110670 #>>45111718 #>>45112933 #>>45114152 #>>45118408 #
1. tzs ◴[] No.45111718[source]
> A $100/ton carbon tax would raise $490b(based on 4.9 billion tons of co2 emissions[0]) per year that could be distributed to lower income households (to offset the effect, making the tax progressive) and be used to fund green energy investment.

Better is to distribute all of it back to the people with everyone getting the same amount regardless of income. People who are using less carbon than the per capita average end up getting more back than they spent and people using more than the average end up paying a net tax.