Personal tools

Argument: A carbon tax helps symbolize political will to fight global warming

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 04:36, 21 September 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Revision as of 04:55, 21 September 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

Next diff →
Line 1: Line 1:
==Parent debate(s)== ==Parent debate(s)==
-*[[Debate:Carbon Emissions, Market vs. Regulatory Approaches]]+*[[Debate:Carbon Emissions, Cap-and-trade versus Carbon Tax]]
==Expanded argument== ==Expanded argument==

Revision as of 04:55, 21 September 2007

Parent debate(s)

Expanded argument

Taxes are usually only passed for things that are highly important to a state because they are unpopular (they take money from citizens). Is global warming a serious problem and important to solve? Yes. It, therefore, warrants a tax. In creating a carbon tax, a government will send a clear message to the public that it is serious about solving the problem of global warming, and that all citizens must participate in the solution. This symbolic message may go a long way in causing changes in individual behavior, such as the decision to turn off lights when they are not in use.

Supporting evidence

Katherine Ellison, "Global Warming-era Parenthood", Los Angeles Times, Dec. 23, 2006 - "What our kids need to know most is that adults are acting like grown-ups… If we want to show our kids we mean business about global warming, let’s start by ponying up for a carbon tax. Let our children watch us demand this from Washington with the courage and force of the civil rights movement."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits