Comments on: Cow Tax Fails, Is World Doomed from Global Warming Now?

By: gerry

gerry — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:32:47 +0000

LOL, I like your train of thought. I smoke, but I only do it for the children. I pay an additional $700 a year since this february in state and federal taxes for healthcare programs for the children.(a rise of $2.00 per pack) I was trying to quit, but now I see where I perform a public service. All those freeloaders out there who do not care about children, should start thanking smokers. I truely believe those who are non smokers should also be asked to pay (for the children) by indicating so on there incometax forms. Depending on their tax bracket they would be allowed to contribute anywhere from 5-10-20% of their income(for the children).

By: silentgrayfellow

silentgrayfellow — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:49:35 +0000

Let's get real–the cost of these pollution "permits" will be passed on to the consumer. The higher cost of these goods may (or may not) lead to reduced consumption of the product, which will in turn reduce pollution from the production of those goods.

How does the government plan to use this revenue stream? Likely much of it will be wasted, and much of the rest will be spent on things not related to combating "global warming".

By: USinKorea

USinKorea — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:52:07 +0000

The obvious solution is to encourage greatly the vast consumption of beef and all cow-related products including leather – but especially eating beef.

Here, you’d literally kill two birds with one stone:

You’d cut down on the cow population and you’d have humans dropping like flies much earlier than normal due to all that consumption of red meat. That would cut down on the number of people using cars, air conditioners, all kinds of energy, and so on.