Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
"I for one can do without a car, but I would not like living through a Danish winter without central heating."

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.

by asdf on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 04:00:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
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?

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.

by DoDo on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 04:44:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But that is taken care of by taxing fuel.

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
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 05:18:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes. As long as we assume people as rational economic actors that makes decisions based on cost to won and not just cost to buy. If we on the other hand assume that people make their car purchases based on cost to buy, then placing some of the later societal costs for high CO2 emissions on the buying price makes sense.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 05:35:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm still not convinced. If you want to buy an SUV to park it in your driveway and keep it all clean and shiny like a museum piece you should only pay taxes on the impact of building it.

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

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 05:44:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And if you want to buy some barrels of gas to put in your driveway as a work of art, should you still be taxed on those?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 05:50:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's just silly.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 02:01:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You obviously must be refering to the ongoing debate about what art is, wtih special reference to the Oil Drum Art Movement. I rest my argument on the esteemed professor Richard Shustermans approach to oil drums as art:

"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"

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

by A swedish kind of death on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 05:04:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I refuse to agree that installation art is even art and as we have concluded earlier, my views on architecture and art are close to those of Italian fascists. ;)

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 05:41:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What, Stonehenge is not art?

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
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 05:45:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I thought it was an almanac?

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 06:10:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Among other things.

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
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 30th, 2008 at 06:15:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Car purchases, especially a new car, are rather big investments. I think people do really think about the future costs. One can enforce, that every seller of a car has to declare the amount of gas a car needs per 100km or something like that, so that people really know what they are buying, but I think this anyhow already now the case, too.
Then what is a rational decision? Is it a rational decision to go to the cinema on saturday evening? Sure. And in the same way it is a rational decision to buy a car, which has more power than neccessary. When the society decides we can emit the amount X of CO2 next year, then it is the usual way to let people buy shares of this emission rights from the state (that is equicalent to fuel tax, which is readjusted somehow to match the overall target). It is market economy to assume that those who are willing to pay the highest price, are those who will have the most usage.
 

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers
by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 05:57:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, the market economy assumes that those willing to pay the most are those who have the most money.

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
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 06:01:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That of course plays a role, too. But the idea, that automatically richer people drive bigger cars is not true. There is certainly a correlation, especially in the lower incomes, but this is only on a statistical basis, not on an individual basis. There are people for which a car has a high status symbol charakter, and those for which this is not the case. So some people buy big cars on credit and some richer buy smaller cars of their pocket.
So for making taxes according to what people can afford there are other places, like income tax or direct payments (or wealth tax or whatever you imagine), but taxation around driving should focus on the environmental impact only.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers
by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 06:14:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How do you factor in the large marketplace for second-hand cars? And how about the many "classic" cars I see in my town, which would be considered junk by most economists but are desired by those with a Porsche, or Jeep, or VW, or Cadillac fetish?

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...

by asdf on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 06:10:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Was this implied as answer to my comment? Because you seem to want the same as I do.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers
by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Thu May 29th, 2008 at 06:18:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because "deciding" to live in the high temperate latitudes is not a decision so much as an accident of birth. If you want to move everyone out of the those areas, you will have to move a perceptible fraction of the Europe's population (something on the order of 10-20 %, depending on where you draw the line). Not to mention giving up a perceptible fraction of our available arable land.

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 JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat May 31st, 2008 at 03:39:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series