The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
But why should others subsidize your choice to live in a place where it's cold?
Furthermore, if I want to have an old car in my garage, which I only drive a few dozen miles a year, why should I have to pay a tax based on its lousy fuel economy?
It seems to me that the taxation system should try to account for externalities like pollution and try to stay away from penalties based purely on subjective bias.
Well duh, because whatever the number of miles you drive a year, your emissions are less if you drive a more fuel efficient car. Are we to reduce CO2 emissions or just travel volumes? *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
If fuel taxes make you later decide it was a bad idea to buy the car because you didn't take into account the cost to own but only the cost to buy you can scrap the car and you've already paid tax on the environmental impact of building it. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
"Were those transfigured drum cans art? Though clearly not part of the institutional artworld, they were just as obviously part of an installation work of deliberate design aimed at providing experiences that could be described as meaningful, thought-provoking, and aesthetically provocative. And the deliberative design of this installation suggests that it was obviously "about something" (a condition Danto deems necessary for being art). I think a pragmatist aesthetic could permit this possibility"
I think a pragmatist aesthetic could permit this possibility"
And thus I have taken a stand in that debate too. (No, not really, I just googled up some oil drums as art. This and this was the first thing I found. I doubt either of their drums are filled, but it would not make it less arty if they were.) Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
I would prefer to more tightly couple the problem and the cost of the problem. If the problem is the burning of oil, then the tax should be applied to that part of the process, not the device that actually does the burning...
Upthread, I entered into a discussion of the merits of taxing environmental externalities purely on the basis of their environmental impact vs. taxing based on both environmental and social considerations.
The short version of my stance is that in the ideal world, environmental taxes should serve environmental concerns and redistributive taxes should serve to redistribute the wealth. In the real world, however, there is a realpolitik argument for not making environmental taxes too regressive and not hitting necessary subsistence goods too hard.
- Jake Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
by gmoke - Nov 28
by gmoke - Nov 12 7 comments
by Oui - Dec 1
by gmoke - Nov 302 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2837 comments
by Oui - Nov 278 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments
by Oui - Nov 1224 comments
by gmoke - Nov 127 comments
by Oui - Nov 1114 comments
by Oui - Nov 10
by Oui - Nov 928 comments
by Oui - Nov 8