[throwawayboise]

The "polluters" are you and I. We buy the cars, we buy the other things, we use electricity and gas and oil in our homes and cars.

We, the consumers, will ultimately pay any carbon taxes. Which may be appropriate, but let's not be unrealistic about who will be paying.

[throwaway894345]

That’s precisely the point. When the cost of pollution is reflected in the price you and I pay, then cleaner options become economically viable and we the consumers pick them. Over time the market does it’s thing and optimizes for cost (becomes more efficient) and cleaner options become cheaper i.e., the carbon tax you and I pay is significantly diminished. Moreover, we can distribute the carbon tax revenue to the lower and middle class folks.

[Swenrekcah]

Not all of it. Some of the tax will have to be eaten by the producers since the market will not tolerate just any price. Then also the tax will make less polluting alternatives more viable and thus likely reducing their price in the long run.

And of course, we the public consumers will also benefit the most from making our industries greener and cleaner.

[heavyset_go]

Prices aren't determined by costs.

[malermeister]

> We buy the cars

Speak for yourself. I haven't owned a car in my life and don't plan to change that.

[mechanical_bear]

Ok, but you certainly pollute in other ways.

[eecc]

Sure, just not that way anyway.

Try again.

[bagels]

I'd be willing to bet many of your daily activities (eating, using the internet, etc.) involve burning hydrocarbons. It's pervasive.