If not a carbon allowance, then what? Pt 2

I’ve been plodding my way through The Suicidal Planet (see Read This, right margin) and am nearing the end.

One personal conclusion so far: It sounds more like homicide to me.

The author, among other things, encourages North Americans to consider a policy related to personal carbon allowances for reducing the carbon emissions associated with our high-energy-use lifestyle rather than price rises via taxation - the key alternative to carbon allowance.


["Too many good years has spoiled us rotten"]

He does go on to say, however, “taxation of energy in the United States is at much lower levels than in European countries, so in theory there is much scope for raising taxes.”

And I started to think... (did you smell wood burning?) why don’t we just raise taxes on energy? The taxation system is already in place. We wouldn’t need to establish a costly carbon allowance administration complex.

Answer (in part): North Americans don’t like taxes. Many feel they were born to be free and taxes just get in the way of free enterprise.

(Many of us grew up to a song called Born Free, My Father’s a Doctor, or something like that, so low taxes and expenses feel like a birth right).

Some may wonder, how can the Europeans tolerate such high fuel prices and in some countries, a carbon tax system as well?

Maybe it’s because they haven’t seen oil spill out of the ground for as many years as North Americans and don’t take cheap oil prices for granted. And the fact Europe has had to import a large portion of its supply for many years may help citizens appreciate it more and be willing to tolerate the higher price e.g., for a liter of fuel. (What is it now in Copenhagen? About $400?)

Not only do North Americans not like taxes but our governments, for some reason, would prefer not to be in the business of public education related to climate change, or share the need to conserve limited fossil fuels for the sake of future generations, or pass on information about the advantages (related to all natural resources) of living in a smaller house, or driving a smaller car or buying fewer material goods (many made very cheaply off-shore) and paying off debt.

So, there may be room to raise taxes but no heart for it in North America. Perhaps too many good years has spoiled us rotten.

Perhaps soon a carbon allowance will be arranged and promoted in North America in such a way as to appear more positive in nature than taxes even though (as the author of The Suicidal Planet writes) “though seen as little different from traditional energy taxes under a new guise, several European nations have introduced a tax on carbon.”

And then, won’t it be nice to see many citizens choose to live small, stay within their carbon allowance (and save money while they’re at it) without all the complaining normally associated with a rise in taxes?

***

I still don’t mind more taxes associated with energy use, as long as the proceeds can be seen to move us toward more sustainable fuels.

Could you live with more targeted taxes or a carbon allowance?

.