Evolution and Christianity and Salvation

[tackattack]

Really protests and lighting things on fire don't work to change policy? I wouldn't have ever guessed that. </sarcasm> It's exactly my point. Lining companies pockets by taxation slowly doesn't work, and neither does rioting, burning things and hurting people because of a steep increase in price.

Taxes must be increased slowly to prevent riots is your actual point. The fact is taxes don't HAVE to be increased at all. It's not proven that throwing more money at something stops people from getting that thing, much less it's effect on where that money goes. What has been shown repeatedly is that taxing commodities benefits the rich. Benefits to the rich increase the likelihood of lobbyists for policies that continue to make them rich. By taxing gas, slowly or steeply, it just hurts the less wealthy and benefits the wealthy, and probably exacerbates the initial problem. Taxes on commodities hurt the populous, fines and regulation hinder companies. Not that there isn't some bleed over but generally doesn't that hold true?

With respect to the specific taxes in question, carbon taxes, it actually has proven to work, and the fears that this would tank an economy or hurt the poor appear to have been unfounded.

Poor implementation certainly could make it unworkable, or hurt the poor.  That's the case with just about anything, ofc.  The difference between instances in which it does what it's supposed to do and those when it doesn't (or causes some other issue) appear to revolve around implementation and educating the public.  Mostly because a well implemented but poorly communicated plan can work and still cause social unrest.  Gotta hand-hold some people all the way to their own better interests.

My mistake, I thought we were discussing taxing gas at the consumer point. If I understand it correctly Carbon tax is a tax on fuels extracted from the Earth at that upstream point. Then the costs are pushed downhill to consumers as markets allow. Ok, so it's like a federally instituted sin tax like taxing liquor and cigarettes because they're bad for people and we want to socially discourage that is effective at stopping those things? It might work, might not, I don't know the stats on that. If it does work it is because it is implemented upstream and it's really more of a permanent fine for something we want to stop needing. None of that mitigates where the money goes or what it's used for. Where has it been successful?