10-06-2009, 01:42 PM
Quote:The point is that not enough people will do that. And that those that don't will negate the efforts of those that do.Everyone can decide for him or herself to which group they want to belong. If the majority prefers to profit from the situation, we'll have a problem, yes. But in that case no solution will ever be sufficient (and not really needed, if you ask me).
Quote:after that it is times for laws enfored by the stateAnd who will support those laws? The majority that needed to be forced? They would simply vote for a Wilders and have the laws revoked, don't you think?
Also, have you thought about how much effort and bureaucracy it would take, to set taxes/prices that reflect the real ecological damage for each and every product, and to have every economy in the world accept it? You think it's possible? How soon?
Quote:I understand that my choices have almost zero impactWell, according to your own reasoning, your flying habits do have more then zero impact. Imagine how many people would be flying for less important reasons if you didn't take up the space.
Quote:There's nothing that dictates what the government must spend this extra revenue on, so you can use it to further whatever goal you like.What makes you think I would have any say in that? Reality shows that most tax revenues go to more 'important' matters such as wars and economies that need to stay floating. Why would that suddenly be different?
Quote:My point is that there is no justification for turning this into a moral harangue, wagging your finger at everyone.Not sure where you got that, but I'm not the one here saying that people are selfish. My only point is that there is no reason to wait for laws that force you into doing things that you already want to do.