[Mendenhall]

I agree with much of what you say. I do notice how your solution squarely targets corporations. I think that gives everyone a passive excuse and shifts blame. I say target the individuals with the laws and make them feel it and take ownership. You drive,you get taxed per mile. You dont seperate your garbage you get fined. You fly you get taxed. You buy plastic you get taxed...etc. That way everyone doing those things and every company doing those things will then all pay for it. Thing is its easier to shift blame and point finger at corporations than for people to accept it themselves. Then good luck trying to convince other countries to do the same.

[slavik81]

Why tax people per mile driven? Just put the tax on the gasoline (the actual source of the carbon) and you'll promote both driving less and fuel efficient vehicles. Whenever possible, design laws that promote the end result you want, not some proxy.

Of course, as much sense as it would make, raising the tax on gasoline is politically impossible. As is imposing a tax on miles driven.

The problem with making things directly visible to consumers is that everyone is a consumer and if the laws are annoying or harmful to them, they will vote in a government that repeals the laws. Then your carbon reduction measures are gone.

[Decade]

That has huge issues with equity.

Especially a transportation-based tax. Right now, the major US cities are having an affordability crisis. Bad decisions have led to a housing shortage, and many residents (NIMBY, really) are convinced that these are correct decisions, that people who can’t afford it should just move out. So, we have people living in Stockton who commute to San Francisco for work, because they can’t afford to live in San Francisco.

A tax per mile is a regressive tax on the poor people who don’t live in walking distance of their workplace.