this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
374 points (94.5% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3040 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 25 points 8 months ago (17 children)

This is dumb but only because we don't worry about energy use any other time. Tons of places in my city keep all their lights on 24/7 unnecessarily, we all are sitting on a "useless" social media, video games and movies and music are all energy uses. I don't want the government to start limiting energy use on things it deems unimportant. Who gets to decide what counts? Just implement a carbon tax and energy use will go down if people don't want to pay. We don't need to police everyone's usage, we just need the cost to actually reflect the externalities.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (7 children)

With Carbon tax only the rich win, we need carbon credits

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

No it’s really really easily to implement taxation that’s not regressive.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A progressive tax that means the biggest users pay the most would probably be ideal (but then that's mostly true in every situation)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why is it not that way already?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Because it would affect rich folks more, so they spend some money now to convince lawmakers not to charge them more later.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So it's not so easy to implement after all

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Did I say easy? I think I said ideal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

How comes I never saw that implemented, then? Progressive taxation stops "progressing" at around the 100k threshold and that's basically just a decent salary. The Rich are never really affected by it.

Carbon credits would be a way to level the ground in some situations and could give you a right to say NO to people consuming more than their share, or at least account for externalities and get paid if you allow them to use your "quota".

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)