Our current existence is unsustainable. If we stop growing we will snuff ourselves out. The only way out through shrinking would be a thanos style culling.

The only way forward is forward.

[–] bear 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Then you apply import taxes. Any restriction we take on carbon will have that effect.

Every country now has to measure the carbon output of factories in every other country in order to correctly impose import taxes on carbon. Either that, or just blanket raise import taxes, which would strangle any country that is isn't large and developed enough to at least theoretically reach self-sufficiency, which none currently are in practice. This is not realistic or sustainable. Stop trying to tax the problem away. The invisible hand of the free market is a myth. Real problems require real hands to fix them.

Our current existence is unsustainable. If we stop growing we will snuff ourselves out. The only way out through shrinking would be a thanos style culling. The only way forward is forward.

This is capitalist jibber-jabber. There is no reason we can't slow down on the non-essential overconsumption rampant in modern society, and still be able to efficiently manage and redirect those resources and labor towards necessities in a more sustainable way. We have way more than enough resources to live in comfort and still be sustainable. "Yolo, floor it" is not a sane policy.

[–] bioemerl@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Every country now has to measure the carbon output of factories in every other country in order to correctly impose import taxes on carbon

No you don't. Just text the shit out of any of the imports until they are cost competitive with the domestic ones.

which would strangle any country that is isn’t large and developed enough to at least theoretically reach self-sufficiency

Boo hoo. Cry me a river, I don't give a shit. I give a shit about global warming not happening. They can tax their oil in the same way and they won't have issues.

There is no reason we can’t slow down on the non-essential overconsumption rampant in modern society, and still be able to efficiently manage and redirect those resources and labor towards necessities in a more sustainable way.

Yeah, there's a slight problem in that. You're talking about a Soviet economy. You're talking about intentionally impoverishing people.

You're talking about taking people's freedom away from them in order to mandate what they can and can't have.

And you're doing it all in the name of an end goal that won't even fix the problem, because at the end of the day as long as we are still using fossil fuels we are still going to run out of time when it comes to global warming.

A shutdown Soviet style economy is not going to create the innovation we need to actually innovate our way out of this problem.

“Yolo, floor it” is not a sane policy.

It's almost as if my actual proposed policy would be one that encourages innovation and movement away from fossil fuels while not absolutely annihilating the economy and empowering government to fuck over our lives.

[–] bear 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No you don’t. Just text the shit out of any of the imports until they are cost competitive with the domestic ones. [...] Boo hoo. Cry me a river, I don’t give a shit. I give a shit about global warming not happening.

And this is the fundamental problem right here that you don't understand. It doesn't matter if you don't give a shit; if it means suffering because they cannot sustain themselves now, they are not going to do it. When a solution doesn't work, you don't whine and demand the world reshape itself until your solution does work, you look for a better idea. We need real solutions that work in the real world, not technocratic dreaming of alternate realities.

Everything else in your post is just more jibberjabber that doesn't mean anything. What I've proposed isn't "Soviet", it isn't impoverishing (but what you suggested absolutely is, so don't pretend to care about that), and it actually solves the problem instead of these candy-ass solutions. "Just tax everything and then the problem will just magically solve itself through innovation, somehow!" The product of a deeply unserious mind.

Get it through your head that these indirect methods that supposedly set in motion a series of events that will totally eventually fix it have never worked, they're not going to work now, and we need real action and not people soying out over idealistic nonsense. Your time to try this passed by 30 years ago. Give up your silly Rube Goldberg contraptions and start looking for real, direct solutions.

[–] bioemerl@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn’t matter if you don’t give a shit; if it means suffering because they cannot sustain themselves now, they are not going to do it.

I'd say bring able to trade with one of the biggest nations in the world is a pretty darn good incentive to implement a carbon tax of their own.

You understand your idea of sustaining themselves is burning more carbon and letting their needs undercut our emissions reduction. This is a net loss.

Your time to try this passed by 30 years ago. Give up your silly Rube Goldberg contraptions and start looking for real, direct solutions.

Says the person whose "simple" solution involves a far far more disruptive answer whose unexpected consequences will far surpass a tax.

[–] bear 1 points 1 year ago

I'd say bring able to trade with one of the biggest nations in the world is a pretty darn good incentive to implement a carbon tax of their own.

What trade? You told them to levy hefty import taxes on everything. You've killed most trade.

You understand your idea of sustaining themselves is burning more carbon and letting their needs undercut our emissions reduction. This is a net loss.

I want a collective effort to directly end carbon emissions. You just want to make it more expensive.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)