Quote:
Originally Posted by captainslug
If you want alternatives to become cheaper, demand for those alternatives needs to be encouraged to increase at a consumer level. Income tax incentives, tax incentives for real estate developers and businesses to offer designated charging stations/parking spots, and so on.
|
Tax incentives sound like what I was suggesting. Money for those tax incentives has to come from somewhere. A good start would be to make oil pay for itself. Currently oil companies get various subsidies and bonuses, from Cheney's energy plan to our tax dollars going to military action to protect our oil interests abroad. An extra tax on gasoline is one way, but simply cutting the subsidies we already provide to oil is another way to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by captainslug
I don't really see the connection. You can't selectively deny which countries your purchases filter money to.
If you want to enact change in foreign affairs, then you should be writing letters to ambassadors.
Actively working to deny specific countries of an extra two dollars each year won't really affect those people you disagree with. In all likelihood they don't get any money from oil anyways.
I certainly don't get any dividends from the US steel industry.
|
Setting aside the fact that Alaskans do get dividends from oil, Saudi Arabia isn't like our country. They send money to local and foreign jihadist and rebel groups to further their interests, just as we occasionally meddle in the governing of third-world countries.
I'm happy to see less money leave this country, period. And as was mentioned before, reducing consumption reduces worldwide prices, sending fewer dollars to those countries.
However, today I sent $50 to a Canadian company for an MPGuino kit that will help me send LESS money to Canada in the future.
