411–420 of 578 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So .. what should we be buying shampoo in? Not glass in the shower? Non-recyclable tetra pack?
Ideally bringing the old bottle somewhere to get it refilled.
Why are they taxing flights rather than fuel? There's nothing wrong with "flying"! What's wrong is how they get their airspeed, namely by burning fossil fuel. Also those prices are insulting. There is no jet fuel tax in the EU. This gimmick tax is less than what people driving cars pay in taxes on their fuel for a tank of gas. Governments want to increase tax on car fuels (hence the yellow jacket movement) but still…
Cuz Chicago convention
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like regulators could just tax planes based on how much fuel they leave with, regardless of the source?
That would incentivize planes to fly with as little fuel as possible. That could lead to some flights running out of fuel when unforeseen issues arise. No matter how you tax the fuel, there are going to be some perverse incentives.
This isn't a valid argument
I am actually surprised that short-distance flights aren't taxed more in Western Europe. The train infrastructure in France is world class and can get you from Paris (North-Central part of the country) to Marseille (Southeast), a distance of about 500 miles, in 3 hours. For Americans, this would be roughly equivalent to go from Boston to Washington D.C. (a trip that takes 7-10+ hours)
Train infrastructure in France is not premium anymore, like our health system. Sure if you compare to North America like Canada, it is still better. I took the Via rail train in Canada last year from Toronto to Montreal, seats were spacious, good catering, but the journey was long and trains outdated. As for the price it was not crazy expensive but not cheap. The high speed train in France (TGV) is really expensive i…
It still is premium compared to the average country, even if it could be far better
> The high speed train in France (TGV) is really expensive if you cannot get any discount compared to flights. I live near Nice in France
Nice is the most enclaved city in France, in the far south-east and surrounded by mountains. It is not at all representative of the rail experience you get in the other big french cities.
> Also trains in France are more subject to strikes and delays. Well any mean of transportation in France is subject to strikes but the occurrence is greater with trains.
I spend ~2000€ yearly in trains, and the cumulated delay I got in 2019 yet was 30 minutes, with 25 minutes due to a a crop fire close to the rails. Yes, delays happen, but people often overestimate them (that's my opinion).
> Again the French government thinks that creating a French tax will pave the road to an European one. I highly doubt so. French airports and airlines will suffer from it compared to their European equivalent, and if an European tax is created, it won't probably make the French tax disappear. France loves taxes, we see the results.
The 200 million € from that tax will go to make that very train system better...
> Want to do something about climate change? Start with yourself I really dislike this line of thinking. I don’t manufacture millions of tons of concrete or millions of single-use plastic shampoo bottles. Our current path is irreversible if drastic shifts in disposable consumerism don’t occur soon.
There's a constant war of words here: are individuals responsible for cleaning up their footprint, or are corporations responsible for their dirty practices, or are governments responsible for putting policies to guide the economy? The answer is: we need all three. We will not tackle climate change without strong change on the personal, corporate, and governmental levels.
I cannot change labelling law to require impacts (emissions, habitat, sustainable) clearly shown to allow me to buy with wisdom. I can only guess. I am certain, despite having above average interest, I often guess wrong. I can't bring a carbon tax, packaging levy, delist companies that don't play along, or creatively rewrite corporate law to place survival as important as profit, or change international trade law.
One new oil rig, chemical plant or drilling field can easily cancel the individual efforts of an entire city, perhaps country.
So I tend to see it as government first last and everything; corporate at gun ^W legislation point, and individual as a matter of personal ethics and social acceptance. Despite having started with me - as far as I'm reasonably able.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If consumer drove business decisions, we‘d still have no seat belts and the ozone layer would not exist anymore because of CFC. In some ways, consumers can make a difference, but only to serve as a trigger for political decisions (if we get lucky). Also in your example, what comes first – the consumer’s choice or the carbon tax?
Wheren't both those examples driven by government regulations?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole passenger air travel industry (airlines, aircraft manufacturers, airports, etc) is subsidized because they’re not profitable on their own. But a robust and affordable air travel network is a capability the business world needs to operate our economy. Boeing and Airbus are two of the most heavily subsidized companies in the world, and the airlines themselves aren’t far behind. They’re both high-risk, low-mar…
This is funny, because the reason they are not profitable on their own is because they don't need to, since they are subsidized. Competition makes those companies use any cost-saving they can. If the government takes an option away, they'll just all not use it anymore and settle down on a higher price.
The UK already taxes flights in a similar way. Whilst this does feel like progress, it would be much better to tax the fuel instead of the passengers. Virtually all other fuel is taxed, so it's strange that jet fuel is exempt. The problem with taxing passengers instead of fuel include: - it doesn't encourage improving the efficiency of planes - airlines can't fill their planes with really cheap seats, and empty seats…
Good points. Just another tax that will be passed straight down to the consumer. Wonder why no wage growth for 10+ years? Will do nothing for the enviroment. "Better not go on that holiday because of the enviroment "
Finally. It's really frustrating to see how heavily subsidized airlines, plane fuel and airports are and how big of a tax breaks they get when they come to a city. At the same time people are shamed for buying salad in a plastic bag when the big lever is somewhere completely different. Had the same thought yesterday when I saw: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1148317244893597696
The whole passenger air travel industry (airlines, aircraft manufacturers, airports, etc) is subsidized because they’re not profitable on their own. But a robust and affordable air travel network is a capability the business world needs to operate our economy. Boeing and Airbus are two of the most heavily subsidized companies in the world, and the airlines themselves aren’t far behind. They’re both high-risk, low-mar…
Is it? Why? Frequent air travel is super recent.
I can imagine ways of switching over to alternate fuels, optimizing the process flows to reduce fuel needed or avoid certain step entirely through innovation and drastic changes.
But huge segment of travel generated pollution can be completed avoided by replacing in-person business meetings with alternate equally rich and rewarding experiences.
In the future, some day, I hope there will be holographic rooms that one can use to holographically teleport to another location and do meetings as if they are there in person. This would consume way less energy and hence reduce pollution. Imagine "holo-portation" hotel rooms that you can rent for doing meetings.