MSNBC medical contributor tells Americans to start wearing masks again after uptick in COVID hospita

I have enough money you could make gasoline $20/gallon and I wouldn't even think about it. I'm opposed to carbon taxes. You?

So, why is the average guy opposed to carbon taxes, even if they're revenue neutral?

You're beginning to look like someone with money and may not get it.

 

Exactly. You should question everything you are told, hear, read, and believe to be true.

 

Children question what they're told. Adults who question must also take the time to educate themselves and form positive conclusions.

Now, about the carbon tax...? Do you dare answer and discuss it?

 

Talk about taking a tangent on your strategies. It appears you're beginning to mimic your beloved and incoherent leader.

From this...

To this...

Well, we can agree on one thing. Carbon taxes are bullshit. Why? As they demand ridiculous goals and that these carbon tax credits get traded like stocks on the open market, and the government and their subsidiaries are the only ones who benefit from them is one major point.

 

Because they haven't been corrupted by the system, yet.

Adults who question narratives are often the ones who can smell the bullshit a mile off. so they question these narratives.

 

I make enough, but not the way you'd anticipate. It's taken me a long time to get to where I am now, being semi-retired which started almost 7 years ago.

 

Care to try the question? Why is the average guy opposed to carbon taxes, even if they're revenue neutral?

 

Some adults question, some don't.

So, those carbon taxes...? Why is the average guy opposed, even when they're revenue neutral?

 

Correct, however, more don't question than those who do.

 

Start a thread. In the meantime read Berenson or Atlas or Dowd. Of course you won’t.

 

Then I bet you'll get it. Why is the average guy opposed, even if the tax is revenue neutral?

You know, it's a damn important question. Liberals keep selling the idea, convinced they have a brilliant, imminently fair tax. The average guy hates it. It costs liberals dearly at the polls.

 

1. Too difficult to implement / will generate an underground carbon economy. This would be a concern with many taxes, but it seems we should be able to have a pretty good handle on where carbon enters the economy given the necessary physical volumes and processing.
   
   
2. Will hurt economic activity. But it seems that this can be addressed by using the revenue to stimulate economic activity / reduce distortionary taxes.
   
   
3. Will create too big of a shock to the economy with unpredictable consequences. But the tax could be gradually introduced according to a schedule.
   
   
4. Unfair to industries that will suffer from this tax. But we generally don't seem inherently very concerned about disruption of industries (e.g., taxi industry) and it is hard to argue that such action would come as a surprise at this point. Also, again, the tax could be gradually introduced according to a schedule.
   
   
5. Will economically hurt people who can't afford it. But this could be addressed by using the revenue intelligently (or by targeting only certain types of carbon, e.g., airline tickets).
   
   
6. Politically hard to sell. Even if it is in their interest, too many citizens will reflexively complain about, for example, high gasoline prices. But would they really feel this way when combined with, for example, a check made out from the government distributing the revenue in a basic income sort of way? Or is there some other effective way to clearly present it as not just an additional tax from a greedy government?
   
   
7. The industry is politically too powerful. It will attack/reward politicians based on their actions and launch massive public relations campaigns. But is it really that powerful or is that exaggerated in people's imagination?
   

 

You're close, but why should be average guy care if rich people trade tax credits? Anyway, you've yet to identify why the average guy rightfully (IMO) hates carbon taxes.

 

It's outlined in what I've already posted. Just because it's not worded the way you want it. The answer you're looking for is there.

I've made the relevant points bold and the point you seem to have missed, underlined.

 

Joe American doesn't care about #1, #4, #7.

It will hurt economic activity (#2) in the short run and this may cause workplace disruption as some industries to go into decline. Uncertainty is a negative when all you have is your labor.

Implementing them slowly (#3) would reduce the shock, but it will only rile workers slowly.

It will impact folks' lives (#5) and it will hurt them in terms of what they want for themselves,

Revenue neutral implementation (#6) will help, but it won't make Joe Average happy.

Okay, here's why Joe American hates it and knows he's getting screwed.... if you have a carbon tax, the idea is to reduce carbon consumption. If the tax is effective, less carbon will be consumed--smaller cars, fewer cars, lowered thermostats, more expensive travel, etc. Now, who travels less? Richer folks? Nope. Who drives a smaller, more fuel efficient car? Richer folks? No. Lives in a smaller home? Richer folks? No. The sacrifices are made by the average guy who is forced to change his choices by the tax. Someone like me buys homes and cars he wants, and travels when and where he wants. Taxes don't change my life.

Joe Average may not fully appreciate how he's getting screwed, but he does feel the bite of the tax as it thwarts his ambitions. The carbon solution Joe Average might accept would be one where the richer guy has to give up something he wants--say by limiting the size of homes, the size of vehicles--shared sacrifice.

If having a decent vehicle, heat for his home, or air tickets to somewhere are to be his, they can't be taxed away by making them unaffordable, That's why he can't stand the carbon tax. He can see what he's losing. The richer rightwinger doesn't himself feel the pain of the tax so he may not fully appreciate the situation faced by Joe Average.

Democrats don't deserve Joe's support because they've decided to protect the planet on everyday folks' backs. They focus on helping some more than others. Richer folks don't worry that much about who gets help, but Joe Average does. The carbon tax is an affront to his aspirations.

 

True. This is how the governments claw back money they spent which they never had. By calling it a fancy name, inflation.

 

You work backwards from your cinclusions.

It's about how politics works.

You haven't won the argument about covid vaccines.

No, I asked you why you think Joe Average hates carbon taxes, an important grievance Democrats simply don't understand and costing support of working class voters.

You fancy yourself as someone who understands them. Do you?

 

I didn't think you'd have a go.

 

Not so. This is how upper-income folks get lower- and middle-income folks to cut their use of fossil fuels while continuing to expand richer folks' energy consumption.

 

What is a cinclusion, do you mean CONclusion? What is wrong with that? It addresses the point/fact, and then it is explained to those with special needs.

Again, you're off on a tangent, going WAAAAAAAAAAAAY OFF TOPIC! So I'll ask again, WTF has carbon tax credits got to do with this thread, does it give a better seal around your PPE?

Tangent time, AGAIN!
What does not winning covid vaccine arguments have to do with this thread, I'll point out the not-so-obvious AGAIN TO YOU, that when your argument is lost or you've run out of ammo for your argument, you'd prefer to go off on a tangent, off-topic to gain ground and save face, I'm right, aren't I?

I am not a Yank, so for the finer details of US politics and policies, I don't really care to waste my time wanting to or needing to give a rats for them.

As above, so below.

 

Whoever taught you this in your education for economics should be re-educated.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/R8lNG7smC4Y

 

@LangleyMan

So what happens when something, anything expands, in this case, the money supply? It thins out.

 

It's not why Joe Average dislikes carbon taxes.

I commented here:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/msnbc-medical-contributor-tells-americans-to-start-wearing-masks-again-after-uptick-in-covid-hospita.612421/page-19#post-1074534039

 

Why, because he can't trade them to you for PPE?
Yes, because he'll be in the same boat as every other middle-class to low socio-economic class person. Learn to paddle up shitcreek without one like the rest.

 

Why is that a criteria?