Skip to main content

View Diary: Tax the Carbon Perps:  Go Green on Their Dimes (68 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm rec'ing this for the solid research (6+ / 0-)

    and the hopes to get a discussion going.  Six months ago, I would have flamed the diary by declaring that C&T is the only hope of pricing carbon in Congress.  Now, nothing has any hope of pricing carbon in Congress, so we're back to the drawing board.

    "@RL_Miller has a posse" -- eugene, on Twitter/"I do?" -- me

    by RLMiller on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 09:19:54 AM PDT

    •  Repubs + oily Dems, this tax won't happen (5+ / 0-)

      The diary is interesting, but the tax won't happen because it could never get through the Senate. The numbers aren't even close. With Republicans unified and about 5 Dems certain to vote with big oil this tax wouldn't win a majority vote.

      look for my DK Greenroots diary series Thursday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

      by FishOutofWater on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 09:31:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We could call it (6+ / 0-)

        The Green Energy Conversion Fund

        and the payments by the carbon extractors

        A Green Energy Conversion Fee

        Whatever, how sad is it that we haven't a Congress willing to

        SAVE THE PLANET

      •  It won't happen unless we fight for it (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PatriciaVa, jamess, War on Error

        If we don't fight nothing will improve, no change will happen at all.

        The middle class will continue to shrink, small businesses will become even less competitive against the big corporations and the very rich will continue to aquire more of all the available assets. Our world ecology will continue the downward path of the status quo. Americans must understand the importance of federal tax policy and how it effects them on all levels. If our taxes were truly progressive in the first place then the average American would not be instantly anti-tax. We should fight for an excise tax on carbon production along with reforming the entire federal tax system into a truly progressive system.

        This is a fight worth having.

        Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

        by RMForbes on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 10:57:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Federal Taxes already Progressive (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          War on Error

          About 45% of tax filers didn't pay any income tax last year.

          And with respect to FICA (social security), so far, very few Dems have sought to make it more progressive.

          I have a problem with state and city taxes which are VERY regressive.  Why should a working-class family pay the same rate of sales tax as an affluent one?  Why should they pay the same gas tax per gallon as an affluent family?

          Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

          by PatriciaVa on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 11:03:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Why does every family in my town have to pay (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PatriciaVa

            $25 a month for police service?  In addition to property taxes and fees that seem to be on everything other than breathing,,,yet.

            PV, I am curious.  This diary is about a new approach to going green.  Yet, your comments seem to deviate from the diary theme.

            What do you think of the information the diary presents?

            •  Higher Energy Prices are Inherently Regressive (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              War on Error

              And there's no way to get less energy consumption (absent a battery breakthrough) than by hiking energy prices.

              So, I think you make some great points, and as someone who in a previous life wrote the scripts for quarterly conference calls, I think you present your arguments in a compelling way.

              Still, I can't support any carbon tax in a vacuum.

              You want people like me to buy into your thesis, you've got to address China.  If the US government mandated that China decrease CO2 emissions by the same percentage as the US, than we can talk.

              In fact, I'd argue that any Dem who believes that CO2 pose a danger to the planet must address the China problem.  If a Dem believes that the working poor must use less carbon, than the same Dem must also demand that the US enact policies which would force the median Chinese to use less carbon.

              Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

              by PatriciaVa on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 11:54:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No they would not be more regressive (0+ / 0-)

                the costs of excise taxes which this would be are distributed by how much is consummed. This would spread the cost evenly across the economy not more heavily onto the poorest members. The costs of the tax would be included in the cost of all products and services that consume carbon based energy. This is neither a progressive or regressive tax, it's an indirect tax.  

                Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                by RMForbes on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 12:11:13 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I think I can address China (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PatriciaVa

                Actually, and perhaps I need to expound on this, the Carbon Conversion Tax would be levied by all countries where carbon extraction/profiteering takes place.  I eluded to this here:

                The CCT's can be used by countries to build green energy that will cut out the carbon behmoths and empower green technologies with cash to build the infrastructure needed.  

                With the will AND the cash, we can change our energy sources in a much shorter period of time.

                Batteries are a component of the solution; however, I see infrastructure transition to green technology in place first.

                The CCT can fund the green revolution needed to

                SAVE OUR PLANET

                If/when countries turn to the carbon extractors and sternly let them know that their days are numbered and give them a choice to be part of the solution or become extracted from the economy, then the transition to green technology will seriously begin.  And not until.

          •  I wish that were true (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PatriciaVa

            The current federal income tax has been completely corrupted by monied interest. The rules don't apply for the captains of industry the same as the small business owner or the working stiff. If you are fairly wealthy under the current system you can setup a corporation that owns your house(s), your car(s), pays your domestic staff, pays for your entire luxury lifestyle. Since your cost of living is all handled by the corporation you don't need to draw a salary and pay taxes at all. Since the corporation does not earn a profit there are no corporate taxes paid as well. Any income from capital gains is held in anonymous off-shore accounts. To the IRS you look like any other retiries living on a small fixed income eventhough they live lifestyles far above the average.

            Payroll taxes paid by 80% of all American households that don't fall into the wealthy catagory in the first place contribute slightly more to federal revenues than the entire federal income tax. These are obviously extremely regressive taxes and they should be replace with a progressive source.

            You actually have it wrong about excise taxes however. The wealthy do consume more gas and therefore pay more of the federal excise tax. You are right about sales tax, the wealthy can easily avoid that tax because they ussually can buy wholesale. This can be avoided and the sales tax rates can be significantly reduced if the tax were assessed upon the gross receipts of every business instead on just the sales of certain retailers.

            You must understand our federal constitution does not allow the government to directly tax the American citizen. However, congress can impose indirect taxes that can be avoided by choice or can be passed along to another. Taxes on business are all indirect taxes because the cost of the taxes are passed onto their customer when they purchase their product. If the customer is another business that business passes the costs along until the customer is a wage earner which has no way to pass their costs along to anyone else. Those of us that sell our labor are always the final taxpayer. We should not be taxed directly because we end up paying the full tax already included in the cost of every product or service we buy.

            Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

            by RMForbes on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 11:54:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Dear RMForbes (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RMForbes

              I do appreciate your passion surrounding the topic of fair tax.
              Keep hammering away, K?

              •  And I appreciate your support (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                War on Error

                I wish more here realized how it all interrelates.

                Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                by RMForbes on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 01:19:26 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site