jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (102 posts)

Taxing the very air itself.

  1. Barefootfae profile image60
    Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago

    Here comes carbon taxation.
    Maybe we will have to wear masks to measure the carbon dioxide we exhale.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-0 … -says.html

  2. eternals3ptember profile image61
    eternals3ptemberposted 4 years ago

    Assuming we go with the highest number provided by WikiAnswers for the amount of CO2 a person would exhale annually, if you charged on a per person basis it would be about 9 dollars for breathing, per year.
    Or we could see that a carbon-tax would not be placed on individuals and even a tax for goods or businesses will probably not be proposed.
    On the off chance that it is, it likely will not pass all the way through Congress, and since the President can't write legislation it will not get off the ground.
    Of course, we cannot ignore the under lying reasons for the tax considered in the first place: the desire to cut the deficit, cull environmental damage and promote taxes on larger businesses.

    1. Barefootfae profile image60
      Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      doesn't matter. It's a scam for taxes.

      1. eternals3ptember profile image61
        eternals3ptemberposted 4 years ago in reply to this
      2. tammybarnette profile image60
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, it is part of the UN agenda and is a great way to increase revenue and reduce the deficit, I believe your article post read to cut it in half by 2020...This will be an incentive for corporations to be clean and therefore keep our air breathable...I have never understood why people think we should just be "entitled," to live in the greatest country on earth, with the greatest infrastructure and shouldn't have to pitch in on the upkeep, it's absurd, Do you get your house for free? Should we all be given houses and food too because we were born in this country. The conservative side of the isle does a lot of lip service about responsibility...well, news flash...paying taxes to "keep" our country beautiful and clean is all of our responsibility!

        1. Barefootfae profile image60
          Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Do you honestly believe that carbon tax will do anything, anything at all for our environment?
          Let's please review in our minds what happens with taxes collected. They get spent ala Social Security.

          1. tammybarnette profile image60
            tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            yes Fae, they get spent...that is why they are collected, for that upkeep I was speaking about, taxes build roads and bridges, pay wages to your garbage pick up guys, invest in schools etc. etc......SS is emptying out because the baby boomers are ageing through the system, and something will need to be done to make it solvent....I have said many times the cap just needs to be removed, or at least raised considerably, and the voila, solvent....When companies pay taxes on CO2 they will fight harder to keep those emissions at the very bottom, cleaner air...when cigerettes and tanning bed visits have higher taxes, it feeds into the healthcare system because skin and lung cancers are a top killer....taxes are genious, taxes have all chip in to the big pot that pays for the countries upkeep, that we are all responsible to do.

            1. Repairguy47 profile image61
              Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              How much higher do cigarettes need to be? Tax more spend more, democrats will never understand! All money is generated from the private sector!! The government can't do anything but redistribute OUR money, they will burn through any money collected and then raise taxes again and again. They will never stop until we become Greece!

            2. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              My point is they usually get spent for anything....and I do mean anything...except that for which they were collected. When you charge a corporate facility a carbon tax for their operations it does not change what the carbon is doing. it only places money in the general coffers where it goes out somewhere else. Another ruse to raise taxes.

              1. eternals3ptember profile image61
                eternals3ptemberposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                So public education is a ruse?
                Also, how do you expect the pricate sector to reduce government debt?

                1. Repairguy47 profile image61
                  Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Public education is an oxymoron!

                2. Barefootfae profile image60
                  Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  No...public education is not a ruse.
                  Taxing the air to get the funds is ridiculous and akin to the draconian taxes on such things as cigarettes.
                  We can't stop breathing and many of them can't stop smoking so let's take advantage of them.
                  There are people actually deluded enough to believe that carbon tax will do something for the environment.

                3. Barefootfae profile image60
                  Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  It is not the job of the private sector to reduce government debt. Carbon tax will not reduce government debt and you know it. No tax ever does or has. You can only reduce debt when you cut spending.

                  1. eternals3ptember profile image61
                    eternals3ptemberposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah, so went I stop buying things my house loan goes away?

  3. Drive By Quipper profile image60
    Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago

    Please, don't be foolish. We need to stop polluting the atmosphere. This may not be the best way to do it, but I am sure you have a better idea. What is it?

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      How is collecting money going to prevent what we do to the atmosphere?

      1. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        It gives people a financial incentive to pollute less. Very simple. As also mentioned earlier the money raised can be spent on technology research and damage prevention.

    2. Barefootfae profile image60
      Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That tax is not going to stop pollution any more than the tax on cigarettes stops the smoker. You know that full well. In fact, if everyone stopped smoking all we would hear about is how are we going to pay for it.
      Am I not right?

      1. tammybarnette profile image60
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No your not right, people have the free will to smoke or not, raising the price maybe even deters some, but using that tax in the insurance industry helps to pay for inevidable cancers...if you are saying they do not spend the money where they should that is a different arguement and worth researching, it is all on-line, youcan read every penny spent from the treasury on-line

        1. Repairguy47 profile image61
          Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The tax won't stop people from smoking, so, no he isn't wrong.

      2. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Smoking has reduced massively in the same period if we could get the same carbon results that would be amazing, not the best example to use tongue.

        Other posters are also correct in stating that this money will be much less than than is required to fix the problems we are already seeing as a result of global warming (despite the clueless loons shouting it's a conspiracy) expert calculations put the economic cost of global warming on our economy this year at over 200 billion.

      3. Drive By Quipper profile image60
        Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        You are right. I am just trying to focus on what we should do to curb pollution.

        By the way, I quit smoking cigarettes. Price was not the issue.

        1. Barefootfae profile image60
          Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Carbon tax is almost like saying Ok you pay this and you can do what you like.
          It will not solve an environmental problem. Only Al Gore believes that and if you wish to follow hi down a primrose path be my guest. He bought a mansion in one of his self-proclaimed future flood zones. Something wrong there.

          1. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Even if it has no impact on pollution (it has been successful in reducing it in several countries which have already done this so that is doubtful) the money raised can be spent on improving technology for greener energy and reducing the damage of climate change, either way it helps prevent global warming.

            1. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I am not naive enough to believe that will happen with that money.

              1. Josak profile image60
                Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                It's already happening. Money is being spent in precisely that way, your doubt is irrelevant, it's easy to write into the bill anyhow that the money can only be spent in that way if necessary.

                1. Barefootfae profile image60
                  Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  And surely you know better than that statement holding up under the test of time. If you want money to be mishandled give it to a politician.

                  1. Josak profile image60
                    Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Money given to the government created the most powerful nation on earth and made our lives possible, if you want a look at what life without government is like check out Somalia which has the worst quality of life in the world and is the only country where people don't give politicians money. Do politicians always spend money perfectly? Hell no. Do they usually spend it badly? evidently not.

          2. Drive By Quipper profile image60
            Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yeah, and there is something wrong with Sarah Palin building a McMansion under a three hundred year old saguaro cactus in the Sonoran Desert.

            1. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              The difference being she wasn't out demanding funds be raised for the McMansion and Al Gore directly benefits from his fraud.

            2. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              And what the hell does Sarah Palin have to do with any of this?

          3. Don W profile image83
            Don Wposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            No. If it's expensive for a company to pollute, they loose competitiveness (and therefore profit). To maintain both they will need to reduce their carbon footprint. Companies that do will prosper, companies that don't will suffer.

            Basically it's a way of using market forces to encourage social responsibility. An example of ensuring the profit motive at the heart of capitalism has a positive impact on society rather than a negative one.

            Welcome to Capitalism 2.0

            1. Josak profile image60
              Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              ++++++

            2. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              If you have an extra expense you raise prices to offset.
              Welcome to Economics 101.

              1. tammybarnette profile image60
                tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Fae, you raise prices your no longer competitive, you lose business, same reason we have been beating ourselves out of jobs, buying less expensive goods from China...

                1. Barefootfae profile image60
                  Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  It depends on who you are competing with and if they are in the same boat.

                  1. tammybarnette profile image60
                    tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    That is the point, that they are all in the same boat, level playing field, same rules apply, that's why and how it works smile

  4. innersmiff profile image78
    innersmiffposted 4 years ago

    Obama wants to tackle the deficit? Oh ho! Why doesn't he actually cut spending, stop borrowing and stop raising the debt ceiling? That's absolutely correct: because he has absolutely no interest in cutting the deficit.

    He knows that the environmental message is as dead as dead, so he has to at least posture towards a relevant issue to get anywhere.

    Why carbon taxes would make diddly-difference to the debt problem, even if the money was used to pay it back:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jboTeS9O … plpp_video

    1. Josak profile image60
      Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Combined "1%" and corporate profits 21.5 trillion yearly.

      current deficit 1 trillion yearly

      Which means a 4.8ish increase in taxes on both those groups would get rid of the deficit right now

      Stop relying on youtube videos.

      As for the income of a Carbon tax, much cleaner Norway raise about 1.5 Billion American a year in a country of 4.9 million people, even if America was as "clean" as Norway which it is nowhere near that is still a population equivalent of 100 billion which is 10% of the deficit every year.

      1. innersmiff profile image78
        innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        This years debt is closer to 4 trillion, and corporate profits only 1.66 trillion for 2010 (that's the latest year I have data for). I don't know where you're getting your data from. In any case, your premises assume that the debt isn't going to increase in that time from over-spending and borrowing, and it is.

        In total, including unfunded liabilities, the debt is something like 117 trillion.

        I'm not 'relying' on Youtube videos - it was to demonstrate the problem to other people in a simple manner.

        1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
          Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The debt solution.10% tax across the board (no deductions). Okay, Washington DC, tht's all you get for your budget. Spend it wisely. As far as debt to China. Welcome to capitalism. Investments are risky. Sorry about your luck . . . you just lost all of yours.

        2. Josak profile image60
          Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Unite … ral_budget
          yes it's Wikipedia but fully referenced.

          Deficit for 2011 is the highest ever (reduced in 2012) 1.56 trillion.

          Corporate profits have been rising but I think your error was you saw 1.6 trillion per quarter and assumed annual because that makes sense for the figures.

          1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
            Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Sooner or later, you have to quit taking stuff to the pawn shop. You just have to be broke.

            1. Josak profile image60
              Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Sure but if you have a 15 trillion GDP yearly and 1.4 trillion debt per year you aren't broke.

          2. innersmiff profile image78
            innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think I've figured it out on both counts:
            Wikipedia uses the official government statistics - the US government doesn't use standard accounting rules to calculate the budget, by missing out promised retirement benefits. Corporations are expected to account these. This brings the deficit closer to 5 trillion this year
            http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/real-d … /id/440170

            My figures for corporate profits come from the Wall Street Journal (corporate shills, maybe, maybe not), and it definitely says 'annual' here:
            http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … 95484.html

  5. tammybarnette profile image60
    tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago
    1. Barefootfae profile image60
      Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      See I take where that is coming from with a grain of salt and know in my heart of hearts this is spin.

      1. tammybarnette profile image60
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        This isn't spin, but is opinion of an author based on the provided facts, so if you can take the same set of facts and build a different scenario, what would it be? What would be your personal spin on those same provided facts be?

        1. Barefootfae profile image60
          Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I don't believe the Obama victory indicates people want to be taxed more. That's silly.
          Nobody wants to be taxed more. This is an attempt to put a mandate of sorts on the face of it and it just does not fit.
          The election went the way it did simply because Romney was about as good as McCain or Dole. That's it.
          He couldn't get relatable enough to enough people.

          But "Please tax me more"? That's like "please slam my big toe with a hammer"!

          1. tammybarnette profile image60
            tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The parts you are rejecting are the facts of the article, not the opinion of the author...facts are facts...I was trying to understand how these facts can be spun negativley...and I was not giving Obama the credit, this article implies this is the way citizens vote, they will vote and pass taxes on themselves, such as a wheel tax in order to maintain and build bridges and roads, I have voted for that everytime, I want my small town to have good roads, schools, maintenance of property...Have you ever been to India?

            1. Barefootfae profile image60
              Barefootfaeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Nope....never been to India.....yep...voted for roads and stuff. That wasn't where I was going there.
              Hey if you like it God love ya.

          2. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            It's exactly what it means, liberals are on averae 6% wealthier and they elected Obama who is going to increase taxes the message there is pretty darned clear, some of us are happy to make sacrifices for the good of the country. As Stephen king put it "Please tax me more for F*&%$s sake".

  6. Cheeky Girl profile image88
    Cheeky Girlposted 4 years ago

    Taxing the very air itself? Oh really?

    Don't hold your breath...

  7. Deltachord profile image83
    Deltachordposted 4 years ago

    hey barefootfae,

    Your comment is so funny and makes a point.

 
working