The carbon tax. Where to start? What to make of it?
Well, I’ve been looking into this thorny issue to see if I can come to my own conclusion. For or against?
I have reached a decision. But, before I share it with you, let me take you through my thought process. How I arrived at the final decision.
Is it ok to pollute?
I started by asking myself a few simple questions concerning pollution.
- Is it ok to dump garbage on the roadside?
- Is it ok to dump raw swerage into the river? Ocean? Lakes?
- Finally, is it ok to dump carbon dioxide pollution into the atmosphere?
From a “pollution” vantagepoint, I’d have to say the answer to all three questions is “No.”
But, from a legal vantagepoint, I’d say “no” to questions 1 and 2 but “yes” to question 3.
You see, I dump carbon dioxide pollution into the atmosphere every time I drive my car.
It’s perfectly legal to dump carbon dioxide pollution into the atmosphere. No charge, no fine, no penalty, no jail time.
On the other hand, if I dumped garbage on the side of the road, and got caught, I’d be in trouble with the local authorities. I’d probably have to clean up the mess and get charged a heafty fine. And, if I repeated this activity, I might even get some time behind bars.
Just because it’s legal, does that make it right?
But, nobody cares how much carbon dioxide I pump into the atmosphere. It’s ok. It’s legal. Everyone does it.
Does that make it right?
I have to admit … I don’t think so.
But, everybody does it!
The argument, “everyone does it” is not sufficient. It’s weak. It’s lame. It’s irresponsible.
Remember, “everyone does it” has historically been an argument used to do some very embarrassing stuff …
- Remember, factories used to dump raw sewerage into rivers, lakes and oceans. Doesn’t matter, everyone does it.
- Remember, folks used to toss trash onto the roadside. Who cares? Everyone does it.
- Remember, smokers used to light up everywhere and anywhere. And, they’d stomp out their “butts” on the ground and walk away. So what? Everyone does it.
Somehow, these activities now appear … so ridiculous; so out of touch with reality; so outdated; so last century.
Just because everyone dumps carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, is it the right thing to do?
Or, should we be on a track to stop it?
Should we be setting a goal to end this carbon dumping into the atmosphere?
I would say yes. I would say it’s a good idea to start getting away from burning fossil fuels and dumping pollution into the atmosphere. Start moving toward “cleaner” energy sources.
But, how?
Where to start?
Well it seems to me there are three approaches as follows:
- Do nothing.
- Ban all carbon burning emissions.
- Make carbon polluters pay.
Do Nothing.
This is probably the least imaginative and most irresponsible approach. This seems to be the current plan of action. Do nothing. Just ignore it. Ignore the carbon dioxide emissions.
Least imaginative because it requires little or no thinking. It just calls for us to continue polluting the atmosphere.
Irresponsible because it means not facing a real cost. Who’s going to clean up the mess? Who’s going to clean up the polluted air? Who’s going to pay for it?
Under a “do nothing” plan the polluters don’t have to worry about it. It’s someone else’s problem to pay for the cleanup.
Ban all carbon emissions
Now this is the radical plan. Just shut the whole thing down. Make it illegal to pump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Say goodbye to your petrol burning automobile. Say goodbye to your coal burning electrical generation plants. Say goodbye to the airline industry.
Is it any wonder we haven’t heard this approach mentioned anywhere or by anyone?
This is probably the first and last you’ll hear of it.
But, I thought I’d bring it up to show it is a possible approach. We could do it if we wanted to.
Does anyone out there want to?
I didn’t think so …
Polluters Pay
To me, this makes the most sense.
If I want to have my rubbish collected each week, I have to pay.
If I want to travel to the dump (tip) and offload my garbage, I have to pay.
If I want to dump my used motor oil, I have to pay.
Then doesn’t it make sense to pay if I want to dump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere?
This is where the carbon tax comes in.
If I want to pollute, I gotta pay. It’s that simple.
Carbon tax ok.
Although I don’t like the idea of new taxes, I have come to the conclusion that a carbon tax is probably the right way to go.
Now, when I say a carbon tax, I mean a fee to dump carbon dioxide into the air. Just like I pay a fee to dump garbage at the tip.
The dumping fee is used to pay for the cost of dealing with the garbage. Making sure it’s disposed of propertly.
In the same way, I’m ok with a carbon tax or “fee” for the same purpose; appropriately dealing with the pollution.
What is appropriately dealing with the pollution?
Well, for carbon emissions it may call for “outside the box” thinking. Like, development of alternate clean energy sources. Like, devises that minimize automobile and smokestack carbon emissions.
But, the idea is the same. The money is used to effectively deal with the problem of carbon dioxide pollution in the atmosphere.
So, in this sense, I’m ok with a carbon tax or fee. It’s probably a very good way to start attacking the air pollution issue head on. Make polluters pay. If you pollute, you pay.
If you drive a carbon dioxide polluting gasoline automobile to work, then you pay.
If you operate a carbon dioxide polluting factory, then you pay. And, then, of course, you pass this cost onto your customers.
Remember folks, the end cost is virtually always borne by the end consumer! But, you already knew that … right?
But, here’s some good news. If you ride your bicycle to work, you don’t have to pay the pollution tax! Hurray!
Now the Hard Part!
So, I’ve concluded a carbon tax – in my opinion – is appropriate. That is more or less the easy part. You see the hard part is now determining how to administer the tax. Who collects the money and then where does the money go?
This kind of frightens me. Because the government is proposing to collect the money and then redistribute it.
Now, I believe the government is very well qualified to collect taxes. They’re experts. They know how to do it. They’re good at this activitiy. You might say they’ve mastered it. They’ve mastered the art of collecting taxes.
But, how well would you rate the government at efficiently redistributing money? What marks would you give the government at operating and managing business enterprises?
I believe the solution to our “carbon” problem is going to involve innovation and “outside the box” thinking.
So, here’s a few things to consider …
- What marks would you give the government for innovation?
- If someone said the word “innovation”, would you immediately think, “Oh yeah! Government!”?
- If you were looking for “outside the box” ideas, would you go to the government?
Are you with me?
I believe the government has a long way to go in these areas. And, therefore the government may not be the right agency to drive an air pollution clean up effort.
It may be prudent for government to step aside and let the experts handle this one. Experts that come to life when you let the free entrprise system loose on a profitable concept. And, I would venture to say that the drive for new – cleaner – energy sources could prove to be a very profitable area.
And therefore, in this case, it may be best for the government to just get out of the way.
More to come
In the end, I agree, with the concept of a carbon tax. Basically, if you pollute, you pay. Same as dumping trash at the tip.
But, I’m not so comfortable with the idea of having the government in charge of solving the problem.
See follow-on article Carbon Tax: Get the white elephant out of the room! for more.