If so, send me $100 I will plant a tree and absolve you of all carbon sin.
2007-10-01 06:11:59 · 7 answers · asked by The Slick Meister 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
YES someone else sees the connection!!!!!
Carbon credits = papal indulgences from Pope Al Gore!
2007-10-01 06:42:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
*LOL* Some liberal had to have come up with that one. But then that is their answer to everything. Tax it into submission. That's why they want marijuana legalized --So they can up the consumption and raise more money through taxes. If they could they would have a tax on sex. If you have sex (or maybe a sex) they want a cut. And if you pay for sex they would want a tax on the act and the money transaction.
If you buy it, sell it, or own it you get taxed on it. Liberals never saw a tax they didn't like.
But no, I don't believe a carbon tax is the answer. Liberals still don't realise Republicans will find a way around the Carbon Tax so they won't have to pay it and Democrats will end up paying it. Here's why I can say that will happen. Republicans make more money and can afford tax lawyeres to find the loopholes. Democrats can't afford tax lawyers so they won't find a way to get around it. It's been that way for over a hundred years. Some things never change.
2007-10-01 13:21:14 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We tax tobacco to blunt its use and to help pay for the health and social cost of tobacco use.
It may seem reasonable to see carbon in a similar way. But there is a fundamental difference: No one needs tobacco, everyone needs energy. A tax high enough to make fossil fuels more expensive than the alternatives would likely be an economic killer.
But a smaller tax to fund research and development of more efficient burning and carbon sequestering in the short term and and alternative energies for the long term might be a good thing.
And you do not have to buy into the global warming debate to see reducing carbon emissions as a good thing. Because doing so:
1. Reduces costs by making more efficient use of the fuel we use.
2. Reduces our dependence on foreign oil
3. Promotes diversity in energy so that we are not under thumb of any one industry or cartel.
Being more efficient reduces costs and pollution. Having alternative energy choices increases energy supply and cost stability, and reduces pollution.
I can't imagine any conservative being against any of those things, but apparently they are if the reason one is doing it is to combat global warming.
2007-10-01 13:40:33 · answer #3 · answered by jehen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would be a carbon offset. A carbon tax would go to the government.
2007-10-01 13:14:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Ha ha.
I cannot believe so many people believe in that which Al Gore does not believe in himself.
NOBODY could believe what was in that movie and still fly private jets, and use all of the energy he does. Not even an egotistical moron like Gore.
2007-10-01 13:16:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, it's ridiculous and just another hidden agenda designed to cripple the poor and middle class.
2007-10-01 13:38:11 · answer #6 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Its stupid.
2007-10-01 13:15:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋