[charles_f]

1. It's pretty much a closed system. "EU governments", as much as "governments" is villainized, remain just an entity in the loop. That money is not going straight in the pocket of politicians. It's going in the budget. More revenue on this front means less to pull from somewhere else. Brocken as the electoral system is, all politicians still have a very big incentive if they want to keep their jobs to keep taxation low as they can. If anything by redistributing that money to people the most impacted, or by using it to sponsor incentive programs to reduce local carbon footprint.

2. Yep, prices for transported goods will surge, which is the intended consequence. If the general price of imported goods raises, then locally manufactured goods become more competitive. This gives an incentive for customers to select products built more closely to their place. It also gives a financial incentive for shipping companies to invest in cleaner transportation if they want to keep business.

3. Overall, yes this is scary, but think about it at a systemic level. This creates opportunities for local businesses and employers to sell more. This lowers the incentive to keep exploiting low-paid populations across the globe, potentially shifting the balance on their side to make social progress. And this reduces the carbon footprint, which we freaking desperately need.

[TheLoafOfBread]

> Overall, yes this is scary, but think about it at a systemic level.

On systemic level this and similar policies are only creating simple onboarding ramp for right wing governments. Look at those stupid liberals how they are making everything more expensive for you! We will cancel it! Vote for us!

Absurdly short sighted.

[charles_f]

> We will cancel it! Vote for us!

Left wing can redistribute, which is quite a left wing thing to do. In practice this does not happen. I remember the outcries when VAT was increased in France in 2014. 3 years later, no-one seriously contending for the elections had a program to roll this back, left or right.

Oh and, by the way: the initial plan was made by a *right-wing president*, to raise it by 1.6%, AND THEN carried on by a leftist but only by .4%.

So, I have at least one example for the exact opposite to what you are saying. I don't buy in your argument

> Absurdly short sighted.

I love how status quo and let's burn the planet is not short-sighted in your world view. That's probably the first somewhat courageous and potentially impactful measure I see on the topic, the systemic view says it may work, why not trying it?

[TheLoafOfBread]

> I love how status quo and let's burn the planet is not short-sighted in your world view.

Because when things starts to be cancelled do you think that we right wing governments will stop at one law? Decades of green policies will go down the toilet. So yeah slowly turning status quo is better than having a massive rebound.