Not based on your actual carbon emissions but based on income – sort of seems like this was the goal all along: ‘Super emitters’: Richest 10% of households are responsible for 40% of emissions in the US | Euronews
And it would target the elderly in the phase of life where they have set aside savings and investment for their retirement:
The study’s authors argue that an income based carbon tax – particularly on investments – could help reduce climate inequality and fund much needed decarbonisation measures.
I have explained elsewhere on this blog that our household carbon emissions are currently one fourth that of the average U.S. household and we have a path to drop that to 1/8th. But now retired, we’d be targeted by this new tax scheme because we are in the phase of life where we live off of past savings and investment:
The findings support the need for an income based carbon tax – especially on investors, its authors say.
This could incentivise people to shift their investments to less polluting industries or funds, while generating the money needed to help keep the globe within the 1.5C warming limit.
Note that government workers who receive pensions would be exempt from this tax on investment income that funds that will fund most future retirements. As of 2023, about half of retirees get a pension – but since defined benefit programs gave way to defined contribution, eventually most workers will have investment-based, self provided retirement funds. These workers would pay this proposed carbon tax, but not those workers with pensions (which are now available mostly to government and union jobs).
Note – the 1.5C limit is arbitrary. Read any number of books on the topic, such as Dr. Judith Curry’s Climate Uncertainty and Risk.
