Carbon kid tax

And with economic development comes more people eating and less people starving so the need for agriculture goes up and with increased standard of living comes more C02 output per capita. As per the link I put in earlier an American has a C02 footprint equal to 10 to 20 people in the third world. For every one less American it's like 20 less people in the third world so a carbon tax on kids in America would be a big step forward in solving this C02 "problem".

 

You're going around in circles. What do you intend to do? Cull the world or try forced sterilisation programmes again? Its economic development that solves population issue. But its ultimately eliminating overconsumption that enables us to do that.

 

Did you even read the OP? I clearly proposed a tax on new births in America to reduce population in this country. How did that confuse you?

Now the question for you is how would you reduce over consumption? A food tax?

 

Nope.

And that would achieve nothing, but ensure an attack on the poor. You'll be celebrating eugenics next!

The idea that marginal changes, such as a tax, can eliminate these issues is not credible. You'd need more radical action. There also isn't one policy. For example, if you refer to Galbraith's analysis, the focus surely should be eliminating market concentration (and skewed focus on advertising). Government policy also has to switch away from GDP maximisation and towards sustainability. Procurement policy focuses on 'green firms'. A public investment bank focuses on changes in corporate goverance. And of course we need regulation. For example, regarding your agriculture obsession, there can be methods to reduce land use in beef production.

 

So you admit you didn't read the OP you are responding to which accounts for the dumb questions.

 

Dumb questions? Like "A food tax?". The problem with your stance is that there is nothing behind it. Take the 'tax on the poor' that you propose. You couldn't even deny the eugenics charge. Weird!

 

The middle class gets a per child tax break and a tax on kids instead of a tax break for kids would limit how many kids they have.

 

Those middle class folk and their massive families!!!

You're going to fail Eugenics 101

 

Don't need to be massive families in America since per capita our carbon footprint is between ten and twenty times higher than in the third world. Every kid a middle class american has equals ten to twenty new kids in the third world. If you believe we are warming the planet have less kid and support measures to force this behavior like taxes. If you are not willing to do so quit whining about global warming.

 

Around and around you go! This is a reference to overconsumption, not overpopulation.

 

Around and around you go trying to weasel out of the fact that more mouths to feed and bodies to house and clothe and transport equal more C02 in the atmosphere.

 

You're not making any sense. Most developed countries refer to a 'demographic timebomb', reflecting how the middle classes have fewer children (and an aging population will increase pressures on remaining tax payers). Do you take that into account? Nope! You just go ahead with rambling on about taxing children.

You can repeat this drivel as much as you want, but it won't change the bleedin obvious: the US's problem is not its fertility rates, it is its overconsumption.

 

If global warming is as serious as the cult makes it out to be why would you even consider the economy or tax payers? What good is a strong economy and a strong tax base when the planet is uninhabitable?

 

Another nonsense reply! Get back to me when you can actually respond to the quote. Cheers!

 

I didn't think you'd like me pointing this out to you and I expected you to start the slander or run and hide. Run it is.