Hacker News Reader

Or just get rid of silly nonsense like this rule so people are not incentivised to drive 6000km by the government.

There are about a billion rules. Do you volunteer to assess each one's impact on the climate and balance it against other economic effects of the rule, or do you simply attach the proper price to carbon and let the market figure it out?

I would remove the rules that aren't related to quality and safety and let the market figure it out first. Making things better for people to effect change is a better starting point than making things worse.

Too cheap for who?

There are carbon taxes being implemented and on the whole i think they are good. But combined with the current spike in energy prices, they are hammering some people.

Give the poor money, if you care about them. That's more efficient than making the tax system more complicated.

Too cheap for the climate, i.e. too cheap for anybody under 40. A tax-and-rebate system can help poor people without hampering the effect of a high carbon price.

Everything should have a pollution tax of the amount it costs to clean up the pollution it creates, then use the money to clean it up