This article is more evidence of what happens when we allow fear to preside over logic. In an effort to curb carbon dioxide emissions from jet liners, Europe will be imposing a green tax on the airline industry. The result…you got it…higher rates. That tax is passed right on to the consumer. The airline industry doesn’t lose any profit, they still make the same amount of money on a ticket, but it could potentially wreak havoc on the European economy and the common citizen.
Why? Because there are some scientists who "think" that carbon dioxide produced from human activity adversely alters the earth’s climate. Proof of this? I’m still waiting.
Hopefully, the American airline industry won’t be facing a similar situation, that is, unless the Left take over in November. Then, get ready to pay sky-high prices.
These crazed environmentalists won’t stop until the global economy is in shambles and we’re all living in the stone age again. On second thought, maybe that’s exactly what they want.
This goes to show that even in Mexico, the loony Left don’t know when to respectfully bow out of an election. Does anyone remember the last time a Liberal candidate lost with dignity?
They remind me of a two year old who has just been told they can’t have another cookie. The only way they know to respond is to throw themselves on the floor in a tantrum. The election is over, you lost, deal with it.
9 comments:
"That tax is passed right on to the consumer."
The tax is passed right on to everyone, n matter what. It's just a matter of whether they try to tax folk to slow down the rate that we're taxing the world, or allow status quo to continue to tax the world.
We all pay when the environment suffers. We pay in more folk being sicker more often (ask the 30,000 people who die each year in the US due to air pollution-related causes, their families, and the hundreds of thousands more who lose work time, family time for the same reason).
It's not as if there are two options:
1. Do nothing and save money or
2. Tax and cause prices to go up.
We are paying, it's just more concealed the way we currently do it.
As a fiscal conservative in the truest sense of the word, I'm for us being personally responsible for not only our economy, but our ecology. We must keep in mind that the environment is not a separate matter from the economy but rather that the economy is merely a subset of the environment. Without a healthy environment, we can't have a healthy economy.
Whether or not we agree on whether this particular tax is a good idea (I don't know all the details and don't truly know) - is the best way to lead us to a healthy environment - couldn't we agree upon the necessity for a healthy world/community?
Dan, I do agree that a healthy environment is good for all. However, you must remember that the environment currently contains less pollution than it has in the past century, AND I'm for allowing capitolism to run its course.
The oil age is on the brink of ending as soaring prices encourage endeavors into alternative sources, and those alternatives are cleaner and, thus, better for the environment.
If there is one thing that brings capitolism to a grinding halt, it's taxes. This is a VERY bad idea.
I'm fine with ways other than taxes. My point is that prices MUST reflect something closer to actual costs for capitalism to have a hope of working.
Again, I'm saying I'm for personal, corporate and fiscal responsibility and I'd be glad to hear how others would recommend doing that outside of the gov't. I certainly don't trust the gov't to do things well, I just don't trust capitalism to do things well, either.
"If there is one thing that brings capitolism to a grinding halt, it's taxes."
And if there's another thing that will bring an economy to a halt, it's running out of the petroleum that fuels the economy, that keeps us warm, that grows our food, that transports our food and goods, that wraps our food and goods.
We can use resources wisely and hopefully avoid having the end of a resource bring the world to its knees, or we can plunder blindly until we're stuck.
I advise wisdom.
Actually, there is no evidence that the world's oil reserves are coming to an end. The 2 largest producers - Saudi Arabia and Russia - refuse to allow their reserve volume numbers to be known (which tells me it's a LOT). So, you can't say "we're running out of oil"
But we absolutely MUST end our dependence on it. There are MANY ways to do this...tax is not one of them
Actually, yes, I can. We're running out of everything that is not renewable.
But okay, we're in agreement that we must end our dependence on fossil fuels (that is what you're saying, right?). So, how do we do so without depending upon it right up until the time that it hits $10 -$20/gallon and our economy crashes because it is dependent upon cheap oil?
I mean, obviously that crash will end our dependence upon fossil fuels, but I don't think it an ideal way.
(For the record, my view is that we overconsume WAY too much for the world to emulate us and continue - there's not enough resources for everyone to live as we do. So, in my way of thinking, we need to find ways to end our overconsumption. Including True Costs in to prices is one vital step.)
The rising prices themselves will encourage less dependence and more research into alternative sources.
When oil was cheap, there was no motivation to invest in alternative energy sources. It was a losing proposition. But with rising prices that risk is suddenly eclipsed by the potential return...THAT'S capitalism at it's finest.
We will not run out of oil before our economy converts to other energy sources, so long as we continue with a capitalistic economy. There's simply TOO much money to be made by finding other sources. Can you imagine the investment return for the first company to mass produce a hydrogen powered car?
Let capitalism work...don't tax the economy. Taxes and capitalism don't mix, any economist will tell you that.
Not any economist, just economists who've bought in to the capitalist system as it exists. They (and you) trust the market a lot more than I do.
Me? I don't trust gov't or the market and want to use them to balance each other.
Let capitalism work? Let's get specific.
One of the many problems of our fossil fuel dependence is all the hidden costs and costs pushed off on others (especially the "least of these," the sick, poor, elderly and our children). Our prices are artificially low, not taking in to account some basic personal responsibility.
How does capitalism propose to address this problem? I'm fine with letting the Market fix the problem instead of gov't. Bottom line: I want the problem fixed and am willing to listen.
Propose away. [I'm assuming you understand some of the many ways that prices are artificially low, let me know if I need to explain that further.]
Post a Comment