Which one is better/worse? Open discussion.

My personal opinion is that an income tax is about the worst form of taxation that anyone has invented. It's a penalty for working hard and contributing to the economic strength of the nation. Also requires an army of government agents to spy on the private transactions of purportedly free citizens. If tariffs are a tax on INTERnational trade, then income tax is the same for INTRAnational trade.

Would prefer a hefty tax on carbon emissions. Since the left claims to care about the environment , it may be something that we could all agree on. But alas, my suspicion is that they really care more about going after 'corporate fat cats' and the like. The right probably wouldn't go along either.

Carbon is a building block of life. Taxing it is idiotic.

Well since global warming is pretend, a carbon tax wouldn't make much sense now would it?

How does government have the right to tax elements?

To put it another way, our founding fathers rightfully had a very strong response to the Tea Act.

I can only imagine what they would do if their leaders enacted a tax on an essential building block of life.

How about No Tax?

Not sure I follow. Lots of things are important for life. There is already a federal gas tax. You think the founding fathers are rolling in their graves about that? Maybe so, but I bet they're more upset about our bloated IRS.

We need a straight sales tax. Eliminate property tax and wages tax. Flock it.

Taxes really don't matter if spending is not dependent upon tax revenue. Plus no one vehemently opposes taxation so we are all just serfs making higher wages while wearing better clothes.

Theft is theft!

Carbon Taxes may appear. A lot of people view it like they view paying taxes and fees for waste management.

Taxation is theft.

A carbon tax is more just. It is a consumption tax. An income tax could be viewed as a consumption tax as well (taxing employers consumption of labor) but I think that is the wrong way to frame it.

Interesting question OP. I like it.

Tea Party said:

---

Carbon is a building block of life. Taxing it is idiotic.

---

You aren't actually taxing the carbon. You're taxing the release of it into the atmosphere. But you already knew that. What an awful post.

Yet every time a living terrestrial creature exhales, carbon is released into the atmosphere.

So basically you are talking about a tax on breathing.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Carbon is a building block of life. Taxing it is idiotic.

---

You aren't actually taxing the carbon. You're taxing the release of it into the atmosphere. But you already knew that. What an awful post.

---

Is grammar really the hill you are going to die on here?

Releasing carbon into the atmosphere provides more food for greenery, thus more life on earth.
Incentivizing businesses to store carbon anywhere other than the atmosphere is removing food for greenery, thus less life on earth. The tax is idiotic.

None of the questions you asked have anything to do with OP or what I said.

Idgaf about carbon in the air, but that doesn't change the fact that a carbon tax a more just tax than an income tax.

You can choose not to burn oil, you can't choose not to work.

Neither make any sense. And since the Income Tax will never, ever go away I am vehemently against a carbon tax that will simply be added to the litany of taxes we already pay. Thus, this discussion is pointless aside from being a purely academic one.

However, if a state like...let's say New York...wants to add a Carbon Tax which puts a greater gap between their highest tax burden of any state in the country vs the second-place state...then go for it.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

None of the questions you asked have anything to do with OP or what I said.

Idgaf about carbon in the air, but that doesn't change the fact that a carbon tax a more just tax than an income tax.

You can choose not to burn oil, you can't choose not to work.

---

Uh, in Biden's Amerika and under the vision of the Democrat Party you can damn sure choose not to work. UBI is on the table with those Marxist traitors which they tried to hammer through during COVID.

Never mind that 50%+ of the population pays nothing in income tax as it stands. Since the Income Tax will never go away it makes more sense to add the bottom half of the country to the existing tax already levied than it does to add another, new tax on top of the ones the producers already pay.

At the risk of derail:

It wont be a choice not to work. The minimum IQ you need to hold a job goes up every year. Eventually, and possibly somewhat soon [1-2 generations from now, assuming AI accelerates the rate of increase] a significant portion of the population will literally be too stupid to hold a job.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

At the risk of derail:

It wont be a choice not to work. The minimum IQ you need to hold a job goes up every year. Eventually, and possibly somewhat soon [1-2 generations from now, assuming AI accelerates the rate of increase] a significant portion of the population will literally be too stupid to hold a job.

---

Right. And that's where UBI will come into play.

So, we will have an Income Tax, a new Carbon Tax (because I'm sure this is going to happen at some point), and a new welfare UBI tax.

A consumption tax makes more sense than wither of them

How is a carbon tax not a type of consumption tax?

AustinAggieArchitect said:

---

Which one is better/worse? Open discussion.

My personal opinion is that an income tax is about the worst form of taxation that anyone has invented. It's a penalty for working hard and contributing to the economic strength of the nation. Also requires an army of government agents to spy on the private transactions of purportedly free citizens. If tariffs are a tax on INTERnational trade, then income tax is the same for INTRAnational trade.

Would prefer a hefty tax on carbon emissions. Since the left claims to care about the environment , it may be something that we could all agree on. But alas, my suspicion is that they really care more about going after 'corporate fat cats' and the like. The right probably wouldn't go along either.

---

I think you're on the right track.

But combustion of energy sources is the basis for our survival as a species. We shouldn't penalize this activity either

Carbon exchange taxes work against far more transactions than any other tax. And therefore require far more government involvement in everyone's lives. How much carbon exchange is involved with the consumption of a salad? It's a lot.

No thank you.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

How is a carbon tax not a type of consumption tax?

---

Where is the line on a carbon tax? We haven't even gotten there yet and Europe is already destroying their own capability to produce food with this idiocy.

Why shouldn't we have an oxygen tax?

That's how stupid a carbon tax is.

I am not advocating a carbon tax here man. I'm just pointing out it is a consumption tax and therefore "more fair" (opinion) when compared in a vacuum which is what I think OP was trying to do.

Wrong way of looking at it.

All government spending is tax. The government doesn't make any money. Every dollar they spend has to come from somewhere.

Cutting spending is the only solution. Anything else is just shifting the burden around

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

How is a carbon tax not a type of consumption tax?

---

Consumption tax is like a sales tax.

You don't tax necessities like food. You tax what people spend.

Flat tax is best. Wanna vote? Pay ur taxes and be a productive citizen instead of a leech.

Abest that, taxing what people buy minus necessities and medical care is best.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

How is a carbon tax not a type of consumption tax?

---

Consumption tax is like a sales tax.

You don't tax necessities like food. You tax what people spend.

---

Yeah, exactly. A carbon tax is a sales tax on what people spend on carbon based energy. It is a form of a consumption tax.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

How is a carbon tax not a type of consumption tax?

---

Consumption tax is like a sales tax.

You don't tax necessities like food. You tax what people spend.

---

Yeah, exactly. A carbon oxygen tax is a sales tax on what people spend on carbon oxygen based energy. It is a form of a consumption tax.

---

People get ~90% of their energy from oxygen. Big brother could make a killing with an oxygen tax.

Pun intended.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

Carbon is a building block of life. Taxing it is idiotic.

---

You aren't actually taxing the carbon. You're taxing the release of it into the atmosphere. But you already knew that. What an awful post.

---

Which is tard level idiotic. Like spit-bubble blowing tard level

I'm still not advocating for a carbon tax

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

How does government have the right to tax elements?

---

The answer is that government does not have rights.

Not saying it is the solution, but what about a national sales tax, and drop the income tax. Pay to play, and everyone gets hit based on purchases, not income. Black Market goes nuts, theft to supply it goes up for sure, but you want that big screen TV? Pitch in.

Just a thought.