So we solve the problem of Americans having to pay more taxes than people of other countries by ...
tadaaa
Establishing ANOTHER set of new taxes. Because, you know, this one will work ...
Well, yes. If by "work" you mean "inhibit the flow of some goods across borders" then a tariff will work. That's what tariffs do.
Seriously, you have to be a democrat to come up with that one. I refuse to dignify this latest "idea" with a reason why it won't work, because you should be able to do so yourself.
Of course not, Why would you? That would involve stuff like showing the economic model you're using and explaining yourself. Why do that when you can post ream after ream of self congratulatory pap instead?
Well I hate to say it, but it's been tried, and a billion people died.
Oh, I forgot. You're one of the nutbars who can't tell the differences between, "we're paying a tax to pay for this road," and, "Up against the wall, comrade."
Do you seriously think there is any lack of consumers world-wide that makes the American market critical under any tax rate ?
Yes, in fact I do. When you add together the US and Europe, that's a pretty big piece of the world's export market for a country like China. Sure, they could cut their export down to, say, India, but that might raise questions about what the costs and benefits are. It looks to me like exports make up just about half of China's GDP, and every source I can find indicates that exports to the US make up a huge percentage of their net exports.
But let me guess : you've got YET ANOTHER new set of taxes that will solve every problem I've come up with yet.
What you've come up with is, "I'm extremely clever so I don't have to analyze your position." I'll freely admit that I cannot propose any sort of a tax on that.
You can keep coming up with new and inventive taxes that won't work due to the simple fact : today co2 emissions are NECESSARY TO LIVE.
That's true. And their costs are not borne by any market at the moment, so they will be produced in excess until we address that problem one way or another.
You cannot protect the commons without privatising them, you can't partition and privatise the athmosphere. That means nothing less than protecting the athmosphere is impossible.
Well, then we're doomed. Game over. Smoke 'em if you've got 'em. Of course that does raise the question, how did we manage to reduce so many other types of emissions worldwide? There must be different economic laws for sulfur dioxide.
In fact, reversing gravity would be a lot easier, since gravity probably is based on physical phenomena, while the thing about commons is based on pure mathematics.
Cool. Break out the math. Amidst all this masturbatory fervor, you haven't brought any to the table. I'd like to see a few variables taken into account. Let's start with a simple model that includes the market clearing price for US-only carbon credits assuming an efficient auction system, targeted tariffs on, say, the top 5 carbon producing goods that can be efficiently imported, a simple exchange rate model like US/China/compound worldwide composite currency, and go from there. If you've already crunched the numbers with a better model, feel free to share, though.