I just read the article on this blog concerning France’s proposed taxation of households that have large quantities of CO2 output. While I can see both sides of the issue, I most definitely lean toward the taxation. Why? At the risk of sounding like the classic image of an older person saying “when I was your age I had to walk 10 miles to school”, I have been involved in the green movement since circa 1970, that’s going on 40 years now. I have heard 39 years of debates about what to do and how to do it and when to do it and that’s about all that’s happened, TALK. For all the new young green activists who see time from a different perspective than us older ones, try to imagine yourselves still having this discussion 40 years from now, not a very encouraging or inspiring vision, is it? I am beginning to think it is all the hot air we have been spewing discussing the problems instead of doing something about them that is the real cause of global warming.
Joking aside, ACTION must be taken NOW, the time for talking is long past for we are now in an emergency situation at the tipping point, if we have not already reached the point of no return, which I am not at all sure of, to be brutally honest. I believe that if you hit them where it hurts, in their wallets, their hearts and minds will follow. Sure there will be some that will just pay the tax and not comply but I think the overall program will accomplish numerous things, among them:
- Mass public awareness and concern, whether the concern is for their wallets or the environment or both, it won’t matter. What does matter is that all of France will be talking about CO2 output and doing something about it.
- The actions of the larger number of people that DO comply whether for monetary or environmental, the reasons really don’t matter, will lessen the CO2 load
- France will be able to be held up as an example for the rest of the world to follow in taking the necessary executive action
There is a quotation (yes, in case you haven’t noticed yet, I am a quote geek), I posted by Samuel Johnson that states
“Nothing will ever get accomplished if all possible objections must be first overcome”.
Yes, there are certainly valid objections to the taxation such as being a burden to those who cannot afford it but these concerns should not stand in the way of implementation. Instead, there should be provisions made in the tax law with a sliding scale tax based on income or even better yet, the proceeds of the collected taxes could go toward FREE energy efficient products and appliances for those citizens that cannot afford to make the switch on their own.
So all in all, I think the benefits outweigh the negatives and the negatives can be addressed and overcome, not somewhere down the line in the future after more debate, but now.
Loved the Carbon Footprint Calculator link attached to the article. Discovered my husband and I total 24, not too bad for 2 people but then noticed the worldwide average for 2 people is 11. I think we failed on the Energy Star appliances but rather than running out and buying them while my old appliances are still in good working order, I am going to have to wait until they need replacing.