Comment by resalisbury | Hacker News Reader

Comment by resalisbury | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Electric car subsidies are generally regressive [0] and Norway is no exception.

Even worse, Norway subsidizes electric cars, in part, by defunding public transit. This seems silly from an environmental perspective, but it's nice if you're a wealthy Norwegian and want to avoid paying tolls while owning a luxury car.

"[The environmental spokesman for the Labor party] estimates that Oslo loses about [$30mm USD equivalent] a year from electric cars avoiding toll payments. At the same time, about [$80mm USD equivalent] from toll booths goes towards paying for public transport each year."[1]

There are much more effective ways to decarbonize transportation than subsidizing cars, electric or otherwise. The most compelling policy tool we have is a Carbon Tax. There is near universal consensus among economists on this fact. [2]

[0] https://www.vox.com/2015/11/24/9792474/energy-tax-credits-in... [1] https://www.ft.com/content/84e54440-3bc4-11e7-821a-6027b8a20... [2] http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/carbon-tax

(Edit: pondering the down-vote. Is it because you don't like what I am saying, or that it's factually not true?)

The problem with the Carbon Tax is that right wing parties across the world (well at least in the Anglo-zone that I know about) have demonized it - even when they supposedly believe in market-based solutions.

So a regressive measure is unfortunately the only (well...) politically viable solution.

Tolls and other car taxes can be reintroduced slowly after the transition is complete.

Yes this is "stupid", but unless you can change the psychology of the populous, then that's about it.

Reframe "Carbon Taxes" as a "Carbon Dividends" and you might be able to change the psychology of the populace. The recently failed bi-partisan Carbon Tax bill attempted to do just that by establishing a revenue neutral carbon tax where the proceeds were distributed as "dividends" directly to citizens.

But I agree, getting popular support has been very hard and will continue to be problematic.

Ars Technica writes that although this bill failed, it will help shape the debate to come.

Oh and Exxon Mobile spent $1mm to support the group lobbying for the Carbon Tax.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/12/bipartisan-carbo...

Carbon taxes have been passed and revoked in Australia, Canada and France. They have been rejected in ballots twice in Washington. It’s not a right wing thing. People just really hate taxes and don’t want to change their behaviour. Talk is cheap.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09112016/washington-state...

> Washington State Voters Reject Nation's First Carbon Tax

> The measure was unpopular with social justice groups and divided environmental activists, many arguing it did not go far enough in promoting clean energy.

> Among those who decided not to support the carbon tax were Sierra Club, the Washington Environmental Council, the Union of Concerned Scientists, Climate Solutions, and 350Seattle.org.

https://crosscut.com/2018/11/washington-voters-reject-carbon...

> Washington voters reject carbon fees for second time

This hasn't been passed and revoked in Canada.

The Carbon tax has been rejected by some provinces but the federal government is still moving ahead with it and they have the constitutional right to do.

You’re correct. I wouldn’t hold out much hope for the tax being imposed and lasting though.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/02/justin-trudeau...

> Doug Ford, Ontario’s premier, has repeatedly called carbon pricing “the worst tax ever” and at least five provinces have banded together to fight the tax in the courts, a battle legal experts believe they will lose.

> Along with their provincial counterparts, the federal Conservatives have pledged to repeal any carbon taxes, with Scheer dismissing the policy as an “election gimmick”. This fight comes amid reports that Canada is not on pace to meet its 2030 climate goals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax

> In the 2008 Canadian federal election, a carbon tax proposed by Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion, known as the Green Shift, became a central issue in the campaign. It would have been revenue-neutral, with increased taxation on carbon being balanced by tax cuts for individual citizens. However, it proved to be unpopular and contributed to the defeat of Liberal Party with its worst share of the popular vote since Confederation.

... revoked in Australia after the right wing party spent years demonising the "great big new tax." The government had used the income from it to compensate consumers for price increases passed onto them, so the majority of voters arguably had no real reason to hate it, other than partisan politics.

A worldwide Carbon cap-and-trade will have the same effect as a tax, without the negative political effects.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com