However, the first scenario will pass the increased cost of fuel down to the consumers affecting poorer people disproportionately.
However, the first scenario will pass the increased cost of fuel down to the consumers affecting poorer people disproportionately. Example: some good that is produced with fossil fuels (including food) will become too expensive for low-income people, while richer (and more polluting) people will not feel the difference that much. If you go for general taxation, you distribute the cost proportionally to income, making rich people pay more. Probably the ideal is a mix of both.
Posted by throw310822 on Feb 11, 2026, 9:44 PM
Tags
Related issues
- Yeah, the plan is far too expensive for what it provides.
- Crashed demand after one of the big AI labs (probably Anthropic because they focus way too hard on expensive frontier models) become inso...
- /dev/random is much too expensive for this.
- Yeah, this always bugged me.
- A year ago, I had the opinion that it'd be too expensive for developers to support offline mode, peer to peer, or community servers after...
- The weird thing about this product is that its biggest competitor is "an old ipad." I feel like most of their target customer base alread...
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.2,000 issues0 comments
pricing (Other)
Yeah, the plan is far too expensive for what it provides.
NewCrashed demand after one of the big AI labs (probably Anthropic because they focus way too hard on expensive frontier models) become inso...
New/dev/random is much too expensive for this.
Yeah, this always bugged me.
A year ago, I had the opinion that it'd be too expensive for developers to support offline mode, peer to peer, or community servers after...
The weird thing about this product is that its biggest competitor is "an old ipad." I feel like most of their target customer base alread...
There's a talk from Travis Kalanick recently on a podcast about this.
>nobody ever bought German cars for their low prices, except the Beetle Huh?
However, the first scenario will pass the increased cost of fuel down to the consumers affecting poorer people disproportionately.
However, the first scenario will pass the increased cost of fuel down to the consumers affecting poorer people disproportionately. Example: some good that is produced with fossil fuels (including food) will become too expensive for low-income people, while richer (and more polluting) people will not feel the difference that much. If you go for general taxation, you distribute the cost proportionally to income, making rich people pay more. Probably the ideal is a mix of both.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.