|
|
|
|
|
by superchroma
1393 days ago
|
|
It could. You could establish a baseline and then have people pay an excess, or just cover it all. Probably only the former is viable. In the latter case, such a tax doesn't discourage heavy users, it's a lot easier to abuse things when you don't have a direct correlation for how much it's costing; why not have a 1 hour shower? It's only 0.0001c to the taxpayer, and you've had a hard day! Comparatively, if you have to pay for largesse yourself, you may be less likely to splurge as much. Of course, there'll still be a 1% who does because money is nothing to them, but moderately wealthy people won't be so prone to doing so. We do want to discourage rampant energy and water usage at the end of the day, so fully covering it may not be the best idea. |
|
I recently heard someone well off describe fines like parking as "the cost to park here".