Green Light and Red Light Taxes: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Green Light taxes encourage certain types of behaviour, Red Light taxes discourage.''' | '''Green Light taxes encourage certain types of behaviour, Red Light taxes discourage.''' | ||
| Line 16: | Line 15: | ||
[[Category:Business]] | [[Category:Business]] | ||
[[Category:Money]] | |||
[[Category:Governance]] | [[Category:Governance]] | ||
Revision as of 09:39, 9 October 2006
Green Light taxes encourage certain types of behaviour, Red Light taxes discourage.
Definition
"There are at least two kinds of green taxes. One kind says No! Don't! Stop! I shall call them "Red Light Taxes." (They are also called Pigovian taxes, effluent charges, etc.) Another kind says Yes! Do! Go! I shall call them "Green Light Taxes." It is fair to say that most people today who think of themselves as "green-taxers" think mainly in terms of Red Light Taxes, a Decalogue of Thou Shalt Not's, to constrain people from doing ill.
That is a goal I fully support. Taken by itself, however, it is unbalanced and incomplete. It seems to make light of people's need to produce and consume goods, to earn a living, and find shelter. This limits its allure, and makes green-taxers vulnerable to critics tarring us as arrogant "elitists" and heartless misanthropes in white lab coats. MY THESIS IS THAT "GREEN LIGHT TAXES" DESERVE A PROMINENT PLACE in our programme. It is not enough to stop the waste of using what should not be used. The counterpart is using what should be used; not to do so is also waste, in some ways the worst kind." (http://www.progress.org/cg/greenli.htm)