tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5465015914589377788.post3082596322891352672..comments2024-03-20T09:32:16.592-04:00Comments on Michael James on Money: The Green ShiftMichael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10362529610470788243noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5465015914589377788.post-63334204256529274432008-06-20T11:46:00.000-04:002008-06-20T11:46:00.000-04:00Patrick: I guess if you tax the packaging at prod...Patrick: I guess if you tax the packaging at production time, then it would ultimately be passed on to the consumer at purchase time. So, I'd be happy with doing it either way -- whichever is easier. I'd apply such a tax to more than just the packaging, though. Even the item itself will end up as garbage at some point. Everything should be taxed based on what it contains and how much it will ultimately cost to deal with as garbage. There would be credits for recycling, etc. This could easily end up quite complicated, and so it would have to be thought out carefully to keep it as simple as possible while still being reasonably fair.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10362529610470788243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5465015914589377788.post-80531982599769962022008-06-20T11:29:00.000-04:002008-06-20T11:29:00.000-04:00Agree 100% with Michael's remark above. I came he...Agree 100% with Michael's remark above. I came here to say pretty much the same thing, though I had always thought of taxing the packaging when it's produced rather than when it's purchased. The latter seems like a much better idea.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16816252455472704262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5465015914589377788.post-86910299638091492832008-06-20T10:21:00.000-04:002008-06-20T10:21:00.000-04:00CC: I'm not a fan of charging for garbage after th...CC: I'm not a fan of charging for garbage after the fact. It makes more sense to me to impose a charge at the time an item is purchased. Charging for garbage picked up at homes rewards those who litter and punishes those who pick up litter. Another thing to consider is that I wouldn't want to be driving behind the guy who pushes a garbage bag out onto the highway to avoid paying extra garbage fees.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10362529610470788243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5465015914589377788.post-81912628025288759162008-06-20T10:04:00.000-04:002008-06-20T10:04:00.000-04:00The $250 increase is just in direct costs. I think...The $250 increase is just in direct costs. I think indirect costs will add up another 2% of a household's spending bill.<BR/><BR/>The question is a if a shift of $1,250 or so will result in some change in our green house emitting ways. I agree with you it will but it will take time because initially people are more or less in the same situation as before financially and won't see a pressing need to change right away.<BR/><BR/>Taxing garbage is a great idea. Whatever happened to the City of Ottawa's proposal to impose a charge based on the size of the garbage can.<BR/><BR/>The only problem is that I'm suspicious of any government of any sort that says a tax is "revenue neutral". It starts that way initially but somehow morphs into an extra tax.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com