Dumbest excuses people have given for NOT installing PV

[SageBrush]

Let's not lie. Unless it's voluntary, it's a tax.

That sounds like a reasonable working definition but then anything you do not get for free is one big tax, right ? The money you were paid to work is you taxing the poor slob that wanted your labor ? In any case I responded to Oil-y saying that 'most' people in the USA refuse to pay a $10 a month tax to "fix global warming." Then follow-up posts attempted to paint a tax as a waste of money.

My point is that the 'fix' does not REQUIRE taxation, although that can be one venue.

People can opt in to clean energy programs via their utilities
They can vote for clean energy regulation
They can self - produce clean energy
They can conserve
They can improve the efficiency of the devices they use

In short, attempting to equate AGW solutions with taxation is a straw-man ready made for those looking for excuses to avoid personal responsibility.

[SageBrush]

Okay let's say, you convinced me.
Now convince the other 68% of voters to open their wallets and pay up too. Or even just get the undecided people to pay up.

You can only be responsible for yourself.

That is why you presumably vote. Your choice is stark: you can choose an AGW denying idiot who thinks coal is clean, or a politician who recognizes AGW as a national emergency
That is why you choose whether to burn coal and wood in your home.
That is why you choose whether to tell your utility if you want clean energy.

Your vote may fail, but without it you definitely fail.

So more name calling, personal attacks and insults is all you have?.

Are you referring to my call for personal responsibility ?

[Lothsahn]

Let's not lie. Unless it's voluntary, it's a tax.

That sounds like a reasonable working definition but then anything you do not get for free is one big tax, right ? The money you were paid to work is you taxing the poor slob that wanted your labor ?

I didn't think I had to say "by the government", but I guess I did. Your example is not from the government nor likely compulsory.

People can opt in to clean energy programs via their utilities
They can vote for clean energy regulation
They can self - produce clean energy
They can conserve
They can improve the efficiency of the devices they use

In short, attempting to equate AGW solutions with taxation is a straw-man ready made for those looking for excuses to avoid personal responsibility.

They can and I encourage them to do so, but history shows that this is not having a big enough effect quickly enough. If we don't mandate change, it's going to get very very ugly. Therefore, more than personal decisions is necessary if we want an AGW solution.

This is why I recommend a carbon tax. A properly sized tax will account for the externalities from pollution. A tax is a more effective and less economically damaging solution than bans or other drastic measures. The market will simply adjust to polluting less, which is what we all want.

[WetEV]

I find the idea of a carbon tax totally disingenuous. It's like an indulgence in the Catholic Church. So what you're doing is destroying the planet but as long as you pay me some money it's okay. The inevitable result will be the wealthier people just pay the tax and enjoy their limousines, megayachts and private jets and the folks further down the economic spectrum get shafted. Then the gnashing of teeth will be over that inequity in life, and we'll have another leftist politician offering a solution for that. OMG school teachers can't afford to put gas in their tanks. Women and children hardest hit. Let me guess, carbon tax subsidies to offset the disproportionate burden.

Consider the alternative. PT replay.

[SageBrush]

I didn't think I had to say "by the government", but I guess I did. Your example is not from the government nor likely compulsory.

Is your local power utility part of the government ?
If they are regulated to use clean power is that taaaaxxxx ?

The biggest problems from my POV of carbon tax schemes are twofold:
One, the taxation may be diverted;
Two, revenue neutrality ignores the basic problem that pollution is currently an externality -- meaning CURRENTLY NOT PAID.

Which is not to say that I would not support a carbon tax -- I would, in order to give people a reason to think about doing things differently. My first choice however is a market trading scheme with teeth and annual carbon limits that reach zero in 10 years. I think it can be a lot more efficient and with less waste and corruption.

[SageBrush]

They can and I encourage them to do so, but history shows that this is not having a big enough effect quickly enough. If we don't mandate change, it's going to get very very ugly. Therefore, more than personal decisions is necessary if we want an AGW solution.

No doubt, but I object to the circular logic Oil-y represents:

He refuses to take voluntary personal responsibility. When that forces regulatory action or taxation to achieve an AGW solution he cries wolf.

[LTLFTcomposite]

Consider the alternative. PT replay.

What's that, the yellow vest thing? I agree that can't be good for business.

[SageBrush]

Consider the alternative. PT replay.

What's that, the yellow vest thing? I agree that can't be good for business.

Business as usual is horrible for business. Business relies on societies not ravaged by pollution and climate change.

[WetEV]

Consider the alternative. PT replay.

What's that, the yellow vest thing? I agree that can't be good for business.

The Great Dying. ELE. Result of a large geologic release of CO2.

I'd rather face yellow vests.

[LTLFTcomposite]

If the economics aren't there all you're going to do is move the problem around. There's always someplace third-worldier than whatever place you're currently exploiting. Look what happened when they tried to tighten up ship breaking in India, the business just moved to Bangladesh.

https://youtu.be/WOmtFN1bfZ8

Bringing it back more directly on topic, to effect real change you need technological solutions that "win" on economics. Relying on individual decision making is a bad bet for the topic at hand (solar panels) because what you are actually asking people to do is transition away from a service model, which is the bigger change and the exact opposite of current trends.