Are you green? - Page 5

Cicero · 05-02-2008, 01:49 PM

Ok...Why? I'll pose that question to both Ut and glatt.

glatt · 05-02-2008, 02:31 PM

Because if taxes were paid on energy instead of on income, you would see energy prices really go through the roof. Also, goods and services that rely on energy consumption would also skyrocket. But to counterbalance that, you would have no income taxes. In other words, you would have more money in your wallet to pay for all the expensive shit.

Then, since everything is expensive, you would consider ways to reduce those expenses by cutting your energy use. You would get rid of that SUV and buy a Smart car because it would finally occur to you that driving off the road 3 times a year isn't worth the $10K you are paying to do it. You would get rid of your 50 year old furnace (this is me we're talking about now) and buy an energy efficient modern one.

You would adjust your thermostat when you realized that 1 degree equals $25 a day.

Basically it would be a HUGE incentive to stop wasting energy. It would also be a HUGE incentive for alternative fuels to be developed.

UT is right that there would be insane inflation at first, but hopefully that would come down as everyone slowly retools their lives. Meanwhile, you aren't paying any income tax, so you have more money to pay for the huge price increases.

Only drawback I see is that poor people who don't pay much in income tax in the first place will have a really hard time of it. So there would have to be some way to deal with that.

Plus, once everyone has retoooled, the government would still need a tax base, so they would start income taxes again on top of the energy taxes.

Cicero · 05-02-2008, 02:42 PM

So people like me that can't afford all the expensive stuff can finally fall to their natural level and die.

I can imagine that this would never occur in the way it's been stated. I can imagine however, that I would be forced to pay both sets of taxes.

This logic does not work for me. If they cut income taxes to zero..I would still not be able to afford a smart car. And that is just one neccessity I would have of many.

I already conserve and live on next to nothing. My thermostats are usually off. I'm not the person that needs to be taxed here....

glatt · 05-02-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cicero

I already conserve and live on next to nothing. My thermostats are usually off. I'm not the person that needs to be taxed here....

Good point. Maybe the tax shouldn't kick in until a certain threshold, so frugal people aren't screwed. Your first million BTUs are tax free.

The devil is in the details.

sweetwater · 05-02-2008, 03:06 PM

I'm not sure a BTU tax would work in the USA because it could not be evenly applied to the population, but it is appealing. A carrot/stick approach would be more effective. Bicycles and public transportation could be given preferential treatment instead of private vehicles, and definitely the old Victory Garden idea. Can't get much more local than that.

Cicero · 05-02-2008, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt

Good point. Maybe the tax shouldn't kick in until a certain threshold, so frugal people aren't screwed. Your first million BTUs are tax free.

The devil is in the details.

But the question was, since I don't think they are ever intending to do away with income taxes, will we be expected to pay both sets of taxes? Income and BTU? I am following the logic of the United States here.....

Undertoad · 05-02-2008, 03:31 PM

I'm just saying, IF they sold the BTU tax on the basis of doing away with the wage tax. Which would be a good way to do it.

Because, to me, taxes on consumption are better than just taxes on wage. We should tax what people consume, not what they produce.

Cicero · 05-02-2008, 04:07 PM

Excellent point! UT!

Of course I am already taxed for what I consume when I go to the grocery store and a variety of other places. Saaaales tax. Can we do away with that too then? That would be Awesome (notice the big A).

euphoriatheory · 05-02-2008, 04:39 PM

Cicero, you need to come live with us in the stronghold that is New Hampshire.... no sales tax...

(It sounds cool until you realize that our property taxes are astronomical because they've got to make up the difference somewhere.)

Clodfobble · 05-02-2008, 04:59 PM

OR you could come live with us in the stronghold that is Texas--high sales tax (but no sales tax on food and basic necessities), no state income tax.

(It sounds cool because it is cool. I like our system.)

busterb · 05-02-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

OR you could come live with us in the stronghold that is Texas--high sales tax (but no sales tax on food and basic necessities), no state income tax.

(It sounds cool because it is cool. I like our system.)

Right. Why do you think the Bush families and other pols claim it as home?

Sundae · 05-02-2008, 06:25 PM

I think you have already mentioned that the money has to come from somewhere. So someone will be paying the same - or more - somewhere down the line.

And if those people are the big consumers, they are likely the big spenders, and they won't like it.

The people I know who rant (and rant and rant) about the congestion charge in London are those who have the most money. They talk about "rights" to drive a car in London, and how congestion charging has killed the capital. No word of the fact that thet really just want to drive 6 miles, sitting in traffic, polluting the atmosphere when it would be better for everyone apart from them if they used public transport.

People won't take a long term view, or a community view as long as there is something left to use up. If it's there, people feel entitled to it and sod the consequences. And there is the seductive excuse of, "why should I do x if my neighbour doesn't do y?" Why shouldn't I use disposable carrier bags when other people drive SUVs? Why should I switch the water off when I clean my teeth when footballers drive Ferraris? Because it has to start somewhere.

Sorry, am sad and bitter tonight.

Cicero · 05-02-2008, 09:09 PM

Yea...well I was talking about hope and personal responsibility, when someone came up with a new tax to solve the problems on me. Welcome to my bitter world!! Bwuahahaaaa!

Cloud · 05-02-2008, 09:13 PM

Clodfobble. Texas has sales tax on food. ??? At least, it does when I go to the grocery store.

and I'm not green, I'm pink, dammit! I'm a pinkperson!

Clodfobble · 05-02-2008, 10:42 PM

Lots of things at the grocery store don't qualify, like prepped food from the deli, and alcohol, and cosmetics, etc. You will have sales tax on your final bill, but if you do the math it won't add up to the full amount it should be. If your grocery store has computer monitors at the checkout, it should be marked somewhere on the screen whether each item is taxed or not as it gets scanned.

05-02-2008, 01:49 PM	#61
Cicero Looking forward to open mic night. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 5,148	Ok...Why? I'll pose that question to both Ut and glatt. __________________ Show me a sane man, and I will cure him for you.- Carl Jung

05-02-2008, 02:42 PM	#63
Cicero Looking forward to open mic night. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 5,148	So people like me that can't afford all the expensive stuff can finally fall to their natural level and die. I can imagine that this would never occur in the way it's been stated. I can imagine however, that I would be forced to pay both sets of taxes. This logic does not work for me. If they cut income taxes to zero..I would still not be able to afford a smart car. And that is just one neccessity I would have of many. I already conserve and live on next to nothing. My thermostats are usually off. I'm not the person that needs to be taxed here.... __________________ Show me a sane man, and I will cure him for you.- Carl Jung

05-02-2008, 03:06 PM	#65
sweetwater lives inside a Mobius strip Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,120	I'm not sure a BTU tax would work in the USA because it could not be evenly applied to the population, but it is appealing. A carrot/stick approach would be more effective. Bicycles and public transportation could be given preferential treatment instead of private vehicles, and definitely the old Victory Garden idea. Can't get much more local than that. __________________ I knew I shoulda taken that left turn at Albuquerque! - Bugs Bunny

05-02-2008, 04:07 PM	#68
Cicero Looking forward to open mic night. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 5,148	Excellent point! UT! Of course I am already taxed for what I consume when I go to the grocery store and a variety of other places. Saaaales tax. Can we do away with that too then? That would be Awesome (notice the big A). __________________ Show me a sane man, and I will cure him for you.- Carl Jung

05-02-2008, 06:25 PM	#72
Sundae polaroid of perfection Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 24,185	I think you have already mentioned that the money has to come from somewhere. So someone will be paying the same - or more - somewhere down the line. And if those people are the big consumers, they are likely the big spenders, and they won't like it. The people I know who rant (and rant and rant) about the congestion charge in London are those who have the most money. They talk about "rights" to drive a car in London, and how congestion charging has killed the capital. No word of the fact that thet really just want to drive 6 miles, sitting in traffic, polluting the atmosphere when it would be better for everyone apart from them if they used public transport. People won't take a long term view, or a community view as long as there is something left to use up. If it's there, people feel entitled to it and sod the consequences. And there is the seductive excuse of, "why should I do x if my neighbour doesn't do y?" Why shouldn't I use disposable carrier bags when other people drive SUVs? Why should I switch the water off when I clean my teeth when footballers drive Ferraris? Because it has to start somewhere. Sorry, am sad and bitter tonight. __________________ Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac

05-02-2008, 02:31 PM	#62
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	Because if taxes were paid on energy instead of on income, you would see energy prices really go through the roof. Also, goods and services that rely on energy consumption would also skyrocket. But to counterbalance that, you would have no income taxes. In other words, you would have more money in your wallet to pay for all the expensive shit. Then, since everything is expensive, you would consider ways to reduce those expenses by cutting your energy use. You would get rid of that SUV and buy a Smart car because it would finally occur to you that driving off the road 3 times a year isn't worth the $10K you are paying to do it. You would get rid of your 50 year old furnace (this is me we're talking about now) and buy an energy efficient modern one. You would adjust your thermostat when you realized that 1 degree equals $25 a day. Basically it would be a HUGE incentive to stop wasting energy. It would also be a HUGE incentive for alternative fuels to be developed. UT is right that there would be insane inflation at first, but hopefully that would come down as everyone slowly retools their lives. Meanwhile, you aren't paying any income tax, so you have more money to pay for the huge price increases. Only drawback I see is that poor people who don't pay much in income tax in the first place will have a really hard time of it. So there would have to be some way to deal with that. Plus, once everyone has retoooled, the government would still need a tax base, so they would start income taxes again on top of the energy taxes.

05-02-2008, 03:31 PM	#67
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	I'm just saying, IF they sold the BTU tax on the basis of doing away with the wage tax. Which would be a good way to do it. Because, to me, taxes on consumption are better than just taxes on wage. We should tax what people consume, not what they produce.

05-02-2008, 04:39 PM	#69
euphoriatheory Sealed for your protection. Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: New Hampshire. (It's a real state. It's north of Boston.) Posts: 71	Cicero, you need to come live with us in the stronghold that is New Hampshire.... no sales tax... (It sounds cool until you realize that our property taxes are astronomical because they've got to make up the difference somewhere.)

05-02-2008, 04:59 PM	#70
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	OR you could come live with us in the stronghold that is Texas--high sales tax (but no sales tax on food and basic necessities), no state income tax. (It sounds cool because it is cool. I like our system.)

05-02-2008, 09:09 PM	#73
Cicero Looking forward to open mic night. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 5,148	Yea...well I was talking about hope and personal responsibility, when someone came up with a new tax to solve the problems on me. Welcome to my bitter world!! Bwuahahaaaa! __________________ Show me a sane man, and I will cure him for you.- Carl Jung

05-02-2008, 09:13 PM	#74
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	Clodfobble. Texas has sales tax on food. ??? At least, it does when I go to the grocery store. and I'm not green, I'm pink, dammit! I'm a pinkperson! __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

05-02-2008, 10:42 PM	#75
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	Lots of things at the grocery store don't qualify, like prepped food from the deli, and alcohol, and cosmetics, etc. You will have sales tax on your final bill, but if you do the math it won't add up to the full amount it should be. If your grocery store has computer monitors at the checkout, it should be marked somewhere on the screen whether each item is taxed or not as it gets scanned.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)