Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 88 posts

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#61

Post by scotty79 »

g42gregory wrote: post #18
standardUser wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, regulations have costs and economies change over time, not exactly a news flash. But California is one of the largest and most advanced economies in the world. The same is true of Germany, which has been getting the California treatment recently. And both are currently performing very well given the global context (inflation, energy) and have proven tremendously robust historically, which makes these constant d…

"Germany went from envy of the world to the worst-performing major developed economy. What happened?" [1] [1] https://apnews.com/article/germany-economy-energy-crisis-rus...

Well, they've lost (almost) free gas from Russia.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#62

Post by anonuser123456 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #28
anonuser123456 wrote: post #15

Can we just tax carbon and stop with all the bozo virtue signaling? Pretty please?

It's funny, because I could, with zero incredulity, say that information disclosure allows consumers to accurately price externalities and market-based solutions are the most efficient ways to arrive at realistic price equilibria.

There is a very large body of evidence that demonstrates consumers are unwilling to pay higher prices for environmental benefits.

The entire premise of Pigouvian taxes is that they force consumers to pay the external cost, not let them optionally avoid them. This leads to substitution effects lowering consumption of the pollutant.

All market participants must be subject to that price or you introduce arbitrage opportunity.

Information alone is not enough.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#63

Post by mcpackieh »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #19
g42gregory wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think will happen when the Socialists will take over? Do you think they will look kindly on your various "freedoms" to be "different"? Check out Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea or even China. Don't think for a second that the San Francisco will stay the same under the totalitarian Socialist rule. The "intellectuals" and "different" people will be the first to go. Always happens, according to history, beca…

Some questions on what you said: 1. Those symptoms you describe seem more general to fascist/totalitarian governments than just socialist governments. Are you saying all socialism is equivalent to totalitarian governments? 2. Do you believe those symptoms are unique and in-masse to socialist governments? 3. Why do you add China to that list when it is widely considered by many diverse institutions to be state capital…

> 3. Why do you add China to that list when it is widely considered by many diverse institutions to be state capitalist?

You mean China today? China today commits more than their fair share of human rights abuses, but the worst atrocities in the PRC were perpetrated in the past by staunch socialists, not those capitalist reformers who later introduced capitalist elements back into Chinese society. During the Cultural Revolution the Red Guard, a hard-line socialist paramilitary mostly comprised of students, were purging anything that vaguely resembled capitalism or tradition. They murdered millions of people for socialism.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#64

Post by stickfigure »

anigbrowl wrote: post #45
anonuser123456 wrote: post #15

Can we just tax carbon and stop with all the bozo virtue signaling? Pretty please?

How are you going to tax it if you don't track it? stop with all the bozo virtue signaling How about stop with all the well-poisoning and the cheap shots, and make your point in a more adult fashion.

You don't need to track your carbon if the carbon tax is already integrated into the electricity price. From the article:

> By 2026, those companies will have to publicly disclose how much carbon is produced by their operations and electricity use.

Basically this puts a reporting burden on everyone instead of the place where the carbon is sourced - probably an oil or gas company.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#65

Post by anonuser123456 »

jtriangle wrote: post #31
anonuser123456 wrote: post #15

Can we just tax carbon and stop with all the bozo virtue signaling? Pretty please?

Strictly speaking, we already do. We're taxing carbon-based fuel quite a bit. All it really does is make things more expensive though. You can say that such things are funding social services, but, realistically, all of government is funded by an unfathomable amount of debt, so raising taxes, or creating new taxes, isn't likely to change much of anything outside of increasing how much debt is available.

We tax road fuel as a proxy for road usage; it’s mostly a use tax. Use taxes are nearly optimal policy.

Carbon taxes (Pigouvian taxes) are a solution to the problem of pricing externalities by incentivizing alternatives. The tax creates a wedge where consumers choose alternatives.

Incentives matter and produce better outcomes by changing behavior.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#66

Post by proc0 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #59
proc0 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Socialism is the requirement for others to forcibly partake in it, otherwise it doesn't work. It's not just about forcing everyone to pay higher taxes, at its core it's about rewarding everyone equally, despite the fact some people choose to work more. The only way to stop this is to force everyone to work the same amount, which cannot be done in a humane way. This means inevitably, some people will…

Someone could easily say the problem with capitalism is the requirement for others to forcibly partake in it. Like they send the police and army if you don't.

It's not though. You can grab a group of friends, buy some land and start a commune. It is perfectly compatible with local-level socialism. Nobody forces anyone to be a consumer. Now of course you have to work... but choosing not work and expecting food and shelter, is literally making others work for you (and in the case of welfare using the government to force others to pay for you).

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#67

Post by anonuser123456 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #45
anonuser123456 wrote: post #15

Can we just tax carbon and stop with all the bozo virtue signaling? Pretty please?

How are you going to tax it if you don't track it? stop with all the bozo virtue signaling How about stop with all the well-poisoning and the cheap shots, and make your point in a more adult fashion.

Point of sale, like every other taxed commodity.

Asking corporations to track their supply chain for their carbon usage is a complete waste of time. All the information a firm needs is already reflected in the price of its goods/services.

This is why economists are in near universal agreement that a carbon tax is the optimal policy. It’s dead simple to implement as it only requires tracking the sales of producers.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#68

Post by PaulHoule »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #42
PaulHoule wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're full, it's a good thing. If we could get just 50,000 people to leave CA and go to a few swing states like PA and OH, it would be the end of the Republican party as we know it.

What is wrong with the Republican Party? Texas produces more renewable energy than California. The redneck attitude of do whatever you want on your land, and anti-regulation attitudes are far more important than political grandstanding.

One thing that is wrong with them is that they don't believe they lost in 2020. They need to be beaten decisively the way that the Democrats got beat in 1984 to be cured of that.

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#69

Post by throwbadubadu »

akira2501 wrote: post #37
throwbadubadu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans repeatedly confused why world just goes bust.

Moving tax generating business around America like deck chairs while China just blasts pollution without check is meaningless virtue bullying. It's not serious and it ignores real long term consequences in the name of short term fashion.

USlers soon confused how China surpassed them in environmental efforts ;)

Re: California to require firms to reveal carbon emissions in first law of its kind

#70

Post by 01100011 »

Daishiman wrote: post #34
01100011 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the _absence of a carbon tax_ already causes costs we don't see yet We're talking about CA here. A single, albeit large, US state. As we see from emissions moving from the west to China, if CA imposes a tax then carbon emissions will just move somewhere else. The absence of a carbon tax in one US state likely has little effect on AGW. I would argue that interfering with market based production location may cause ev…

This is just one step in a series of future legislation being planned in many developed countries to price carbon from imported goods.

Ok, so all the carbon moves to developing nations that don't care. What will we have achieved beyond lowering the standard of living in developed nations?
Post reply on HN