[ImAnAmateur]

Its frustrating because it buries better points under mud. The effective way to reduce jet emissions is not to publicly rag on the people who have the money to use the service. I would go so far as to say that the author does not actually care about the subject at all, only perhaps being able to deride others to prop themselves up as not as bad as them.

The subject as presented like this leaves little room for talk about alternatives or ways to reduce jet emissions. It poisons the conversation by starting down the wrong direction.

[snapplebobapple]

More than that, it ignores the fundamental principle that America is founded on: I paid for it STFU. If there is actual market failure due to externalities then get the votes to raise the cost to cover the externalities (i.e though a carbon tax), but don't think your judgement calls on who should be able to do what should have any bearing on reality. Raise the price until your externality is properly priced or until you lose the political will to implement and then let everyone decide if they are buying or not at the new price. What made America great was recognizing everyone is too stupid to make any of these calls and letting individuals exercise their own judgement (and experience the costs of that judgement). It was a great system that worked wonders and was self regulating and we have drifted far too far from it.

[bradknowles]

Haven’t you heard? One dollar == one vote.

So, who has all the dollars, and therefore all the votes?

If you don’t have any dollars to buy off your entity in Congress, then how are you going to get the laws changed?

[dzhiurgis]

Better start would be petrol not aviation fuel

[snapplebobapple]

Thats the beauty of a carbon tax. It doesnt care, you emit, you pay. Done right it makes no judgements, it just makes emitting cost more and then lets people decide if they still want to emit or not.

[zzo38computer]

> The subject as presented like this leaves little room for talk about alternatives or ways to reduce jet emissions. It poisons the conversation by starting down the wrong direction.

Well, it is the wrong direction for reducing jet emissions, because the privacy of the registration of private jets isn't what causes or reduces jet emissions. It is a separate issue.

Unfortunately they can be confused with each other. They should have a way to reduce jet emissions, but it is a separate issue from anonymous registration of airplanes, so should be considered too, but this is something else, anyways.

[baryphonic]

I agree with you. I'd add that this kind of snarky sniping nonsense causes rifts between people who might otherwise agree with one another.