-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
How much of your income would you be willing to give up to tackle climate change?
- Thread starter Window
- Start date
This is absolutely inevitable. The general population needs to change their lifestyle. They'll just come kicking and screaming doing it. If they don't, mother nature will wipe out a lot bunch of us to solve the problem.
The latter is what I think a lot of people aren't thinking of when they respond to this thread.
For example, if you consider purchasing a hybrid or an electric car as tackling climate change, the difference in cost between it and the equivalent gasoline powered car would be income you are giving up to tackle climate change.
That's for all those loaded folks on here that make 100k + a year to pay, I'm just trying to survive out here I'm not paying no climate tax.
Assuming it would actually seriously help, I'd give up 20-30% easy. I would do more too, but 20-30% is what I voted.
Like I have 30% to just "give away." Are you going to be the sole arbiter of what expenses are valid and which are not?
I wouldn't be "comfortable," giving up that much of my income and I would have to make major changes to my family's life style, but if I could be confident that doing so would actually make a significant difference, I wouldn't hesitate.
Not at all. Give away all your money if you want. What i am against is getting on a high horse and shaming people who might not have anything to give.
Guess what, if i made 100k a year i could give 80% of it away and still be left with more than i earn now. But i don't make 100k a year. An extra 30% tax would literally leave me homeless.
So anyone who comes in here and calls me selfish can fuck right off.
Of course major companies and rich people should contribute, but this problem is big enough that it will impact all of our lives. Yes, even you, middle class person reading this right now.
8 BILLION people can't eat beef every day of the week and fly around the world a couple of times a year. That needs to stop right now because it's ruining the planet, we all need to cut back on this.
Our governments need to impose hefty taxes on undesirable behavior or outright ban it, it's the only way we can make this work. But of course we'd rather point fingers at each-other.
So we're fucked.
8 BILLION people can't eat beef every day of the week and fly around the world a couple of times a year. That needs to stop right now because it's ruining the planet, we all need to cut back on this.
Our governments need to impose hefty taxes on undesirable behavior or outright ban it, it's the only way we can make this work. But of course we'd rather point fingers at each-other.
So we're fucked.
Zero, im already struggling as is. The rich deserve their money to be taken to fix this mess, not mine.
Just add it to the gas taxes as carbon taxes. Then tack on monstrous taxes to jet fuel and for whatever fuel yachts use. Everyone pays and those who bike and use transit gets nailed less as they should.
I'm really curious as to what people think the government should actually do, or businesses actually do, or the government taxing the rich and businesses would actually do that doesn't in the end make you pay more for things you buy, and the cost of daily necessities? It's easy to point the finger at somewhere else but there's no realistic scenario where the rest of us get isolated from having this hit us financially. What are people thinking of where we don't in the end get this financially? Legitimately curious as to what I'm not considering.
OP
OP
Yeah I don't get it either. I think people are either missing the flow on effects of their policy proposals or want radical change from market based to a state planned economy. A tax on the super wealthy or luxuries could also maybe minimise impact on middle and low income households, using that money to subsidise green alternatives but I have not thought about its flow on implications.
Well for people who make less it is a lot. I wonder if all the people who want the rich to pay taxes would feel the same if they had to pay them as well.
Pointless question without knowing what that money is going towards, what others are contributing and what my share's impact will be.
I mean, you said it yourself - you don't want to pat them, but you want the wealthy to pay them as well.
I get that if you make less, and on paper, it sounds like a lot but in reality it isn't. It's not even close to true wealth, where the inequality is.
Well I still think 100k and up should pay when we are talking about giving back to society.
This is much worse lol.
Oh you're poor and can't buy a new EV? Well guess you have to walk 50miles by foot to get to that job in the city, where you can't afford a flat and it's public transport because you're to poor already as is.
The fucking rich and corporations need to pay the bill, (by just paying as much in taxes as everyone else) not fucking the poor or (non existent) middle class even further.
I mean, I wouldn't like it, but I also wouldn't protest paying a little more in taxes. Ultimately though, the taxing should be an aggressive campaign against the richest among us.
Then the GOP misinformation campaign moves on as planned, with the wealthy safe using the middle class as a shield.
The wealthy should pay too, it should just start at 100k and increase from there.
That $100k making nurse is probably contributing a whole lot more than you are.
You are wildly clueless if you believe $100k is some magical threshold that makes problems go away, especially if you live in a coastal city in the US. Nurses, teachers, those people working in IT or families with two people making $50k each are not the problem and not the ones we should be targeting.
As someone else already correctly mentioned it only shields the wealthy as people continue to feed into the garbage that the middle class is the culprit and like clock work the middle and lower class keep arguing amongst themselves while those at the top keep walking away with all the money, fucking shit up and experiencing zero consequence.
So in defense of that nurse who contributes to society by working to keep people alive and healthy, or that nurse who cares for children with mental disabilities as my wife does, what do you do and how do you contribute to society?
Last edited:
I live in a costal city, I'm spitting distance from the ocean and I'm not talking about combined Incomes. Teachers out here make Bank btw it's not a low wage area.
I have to worry more about getting popped by the cops or some random man, mad at the world before the sun God claims my soul.
I earn a pretty good salary, but I would rather pay for us to work on the injustice of black people in America before the climate. The justice system and the societal structure is really messed up here. I picked 0 due to the facts above.
You all can worry about the climate killing you. Our immediate threat certainly isn't climate change. I wish it was, but unfortunately, it isn't.
I earn a pretty good salary, but I would rather pay for us to work on the injustice of black people in America before the climate. The justice system and the societal structure is really messed up here. I picked 0 due to the facts above.
You all can worry about the climate killing you. Our immediate threat certainly isn't climate change. I wish it was, but unfortunately, it isn't.
100k is nothing living in California. We make well over this and still have to monitor spending habits here and there.
Last edited:
So even better. If you understand teachers are some of those who make good money and are part of that $100k you are targeting then why is it on them to give back to society? They already are by educating our children. They aren't the ones directly messing up the planet so why is it on them to pay a tax while you aren't?
Do you magically contribute more becuase you make less? I just don't get your argument when you use "give back to society". You seem to know full well who these $100k earners are.
There are several possibilities, but to put it simple: A reasonable carbon tax would punish those who consume above the country's average, while benefits those who consume less. This can either happen in form of tax benefits, subsidies for public transportation or a general tax reduction for the sake of installing a new carbon tax.
I know it works because we already have several similar taxes in my country.
Yes, all teachers are Trump loving conservatives. Jeez... do you even think before you type?
Im positive this conversation isn't going to really go anywhere so if you wish to have the last word, by all means go ahead.
It's ok to make the sacrifice if you are in some 3rd world developing country.
Most of us would be happy to chip in IF corporations and billionaires also contributed in the SAME WAY, as in paying their taxes, paying the same percentage, etc. That's the only way this could work, cause right now it's placing the blame on the common person when their contribution to pollution is significantly less.
LOL. It's not "fuck you, got mine".
Those billion dollar companies should do/pay more for climate change.
I never said they all are,
But you seem to be putting those professions on loftier grounds. They do enough for society more than you do, they teach our kids, etc etc
The ones out by me support Trump/ GOP, being a nurse or a teacher doesn't mean someone is a morally righteous person.
i rather the people i know that make that much money paying a little more in taxes than going out and buying Audi's. People that makes less than 100k shouldn't have to.
I'm not saying take a quarter of their pay, but they should be on the low end of this climate change tax tree. The more you make, the more you pay. Which means yes the people making 300k, 800k are paying a hefty price.