The Left Seeks Taxes on Carbon That Would Assure Only the Super Rich Could Afford To Travel – IOTW Report

The Left Seeks Taxes on Carbon That Would Assure Only the Super Rich Could Afford To Travel

Keep voting for the left, you morons. If they had their way you would only be able to travel by bicycle. (Forget travel by horse. This will be outlawed as inhumane.)

A $49 a gallon gas TAX is needed to curb global warming, says the IPCC.

Daily Caller-

In 2030, the report says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $5,500 — that’s equivalent to a $49 per gallon gas tax.

If you think that’s an unlikely scenario, you’re probably not wrong. However, it’s what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, released Sunday night, sees as a policy option for reducing emissions enough to keep projected warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.

more

ht/ fdr in hell

 

12 Comments on The Left Seeks Taxes on Carbon That Would Assure Only the Super Rich Could Afford To Travel

  1. If these self-appointed aspiring despots can propose with impunity societal changes “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming, then why can’t I propose, with equal impunity, societal changes unprecedented in terms of the abrupt elimination of an entire class of self-appointed aspiring despots?

    18
  2. Then there is this, from 6 months ago: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-co2-emissions-rise-after-paris-climate-agreement-signed/

    FTA: “Asia accounted for two-thirds of the increase in global carbon emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions also climbed in the European Union.

    Those increases stood in contrast to the United States, which posted the largest year-over-year decline in carbon emissions of any advanced economy. The decline was all the more notable given President Trump’s outspoken opposition to global attempts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and his plans to withdraw from the Paris deal.”

    4
  3. First:

    1. Ban all private jets. Everyone flies commercial.
    2. Ban all motorized yachts over 50 feet in length.
    3. Ban all 2 seater sports cars that achieve less than 25 MPG.
    4. Impose a $500 per square foot tax on all private residences (including guest houses) bigger than 5000 square feet.
    5. For anyone with more than 2 houses used for a private residence for more than 30 days in a calendar year, impose a $500 per square foot tax on the bigger residence.

    Harsh? Hey, all I’m doing is being a good progressive and punishing the rich like the left says it wants to do. People like Gore and DiCaprio need to do their part first and lead by example.

    7
  4. @Wyatt – exactly, I have been saying that for years and asking my militant environmentalists whether they follow that. I usually add that most forms of entertainment should be banned, like sports, auto racing, Disneyland, etc., particularly because people drive unnecessarily to and from those things.

    2
  5. So was it a carbon tax 13.5 thousand years ago that caused the Woolly Mammoths to freeze solid while still chewing their cud because they froze so fast?
    Didn’t think so……

    5
  6. Whats the big deal? If everyone has a basic universal income plus 30 dollars an hour minimum wage, this carbon tax would pay for itself.

    Off topic…. paint thinner is still the best high for your hard earned money.

    4
  7. Notice it’s $49 and not $50. Fifty is too round and sounds made up. buut forty-nine, that took some serious number crunching to arrive at. Nobody will question forty-nine dollars.

    5
  8. They can estimate that x trillion dollars will reduce global temperature by .0001 degree C but they can’t tell HOW they came up with that impressive reduction, how it will be accomplished, nor what difference it will make.

    Notice they NEVER tell how that money will be spent, who decides how much and where it goes, nor specifically what it will be spent on to actually, you know, reduce warming. Meanwhile, the countries that pollute the most are exempt and more than cancel any gains that might have been made.

    1

Comments are closed.