Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Garett Jones More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
TrackBack URL: http://econlog.econlib.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/719
The author at Eli Dourado in a related article titled Smart Carbon Taxation writes:
COMMENTS (5 to date)
Robin Hanson writes:
I like it! Using the futures price would be a substantial improvement too. Posted June 13, 2007 1:17 PM
Matthew c writes:
Nice idea. So does this mean that if the predicted tropospheric warming either occurs, or does not, the respective parties to the global warming controversy will end their debate? Posted June 13, 2007 2:07 PM
Robert Speirs writes:
I like the idea of running the tax in reverse if cooling occurs. And, of course, outlawing hybrids and solar panels. And no nuke plants. Coal only! Or should the interpretation be that cooling would invalidate the straight-line incremental warming model completely and means that future temperatures cannot be predicted with any accuracy, as common sense would suggest? Posted June 14, 2007 4:04 PM
Patri Friedman writes:
But Pigouvian taxes are not efficient if they are taken and wastefully spent by governments: http://catallarchy.net/blog/archives/2006/08/07/pigovian-taxes-are-not-efficient-if-the-money-gets-wasted/ Unless you can demonstrate that there is a real prospect of a Pigouvian scheme where the money gets given to people instead of spent by governments, as far as I'm concerned all this Pigouvian stuff is just more excuses for taxing and spending. Posted June 14, 2007 6:13 PM
Brent Wheeler writes:
I like the idea for its adaptive nature. A colleague points out though, the danger that temperature may rise for reasons other than carbon emissions - notably natural reasons - then we have the worst of both worlds - high taxes and the costs of having cut carbon consumption .... and arguably no way to know it So whats the fix guys? Posted June 17, 2007 6:32 AM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||