Should there be air tax?

[sasha]

I think that it would be the right moment to introduce international air tax to countries. It could be calculated on the basis of country population and industrial developement, and lowered on the basis of acres under forest in that country. Money wich would be gained on that way should be invested in science projects and production of ecologicaly safe inventions.
It should be conducted by UN. What do you think about this?

[Faw_Peter]

Do you mean a tax for breathing the air, or a tax for polluting the air? People can't pay taxes for breathing the air. Also, people can't pay for the big factories' fault, which give thousands and millions tons of pollution yearly.

[M.Helen]

I am remembered the movie "Total recall" (staring A. Schwarzenegger) where people on Mars were paying taxes for the air. If the tax wasn't paid, the air was ceased

[Steven]

That's awful. If it's so, what can air be measured with? Cubic metres - no. What then?

[M.Helen]

air tax is also understood as the tax paid for air travelling. If so, I am neutral in imposing a tax to airlines. It is alraedy too expensive to travel by airliners, let alone if the taxes increase.

[sasha]

I think that it must be international taxes paying by countries, not individuals, to an international organisation. If a country provide enough forests, than it could make some profit.

The problem is calculating this taxes, because some countries have wast deserts like Sudan or oceans like islands in Malesia and Polinesia. But the key thing could be number of citizents.

We must take responsibility toward air and forests! In this way Brasil wil consider stopping and maybe renouving jungle.

[willyoumind]

I didn't know about the air tax, but I did know that in Japan, people really paid for inhale the air that enriched with oxygen and vitamins for over 10 minutes!

[Hakan G]

I didn't know about the air tax, but I did know that in Japan, people really paid for inhale the air that enriched with oxygen and vitamins for over 10 minutes!

Yes, I remember this when visiting Tokyo. The oxygen is sold in special bottles, in local supermarkets, in different scents. That's a very good idea, and I think governments should make it available for free in big cities. But regarding air taxes – they should be applied for air-polluting companies, like factories, transport companies, and others.

[Steven]

I think that it must be international taxes paying by countries, not individuals, to an international organisation.

Sasha, in this case, a normal state would increase its common taxes to the citizens. If it pays considerable amounts to that organization, this doesn't mean it will forget about the fact it should have reserves. Thereby tax increase for common citizens is inevitable.

[sasha]

I think so also. This will lead to more pressure to goverment to take care of forests and plant more wood, because it would lower air tax.
If a country have more woods than it is demanded, than it should be awarded with a part of money that is gathered with air taxes. In that countries people would have material benefit of enviromental policy of their country.

[M.Helen]

Environemnt improvement is a quite abstract thing. Many pay taxes but they wanna see concrete results instead of only claims. Even if money is spent on improving the environment, it doesn't often show apparent results. We should deem that.

[sasha]

I am not quite sure of that. As things stand now, there are no real material motive to develope enviromental safe technologies. Most of enterpreurers are blinded with economical reasons and negate enviromental neads of society. States are not powerfull enough to place ecological interests in front of economical. There must be some kind of mechanism which makes envaromental needs over economical, at least at some point of misuse of nature. International taxes could be on such mechanism.

As much as country seed wood, it would be economicaly better for that country. As much as some country chop trees it would be economicaly worst for that country. The balance between economy and enviroment must be at point of endangering natural conditions of living. Sure, the price of wood would raise, but we must make some compromises if we want to survive in next centuries.

The need for industrial developement must be discoureged by this mechanism. Investments must be outsmarted, not to find their ways to enviroment degrading enterprizes. But at some peace, that is objectivly neaded for humans, it may provide profit. Investments must be discouraged a little, thats what Jay W. Forrester calculated in '70.

[Benn]

As a proposal for encouraging world governments to carry out policies on the advantage of environment, I would suggest that big grants (of millions) are given to the countries that implement such policies.

[sasha]

As a proposal for encouraging world governments to carry out policies on the advantage of environment, I would suggest that big grants (of millions) are given to the countries that implement such policies.

That's the idea. If country have, say, more than 3 trees per capita, than it get money from taxes gathered from countries that have less trees per capita. Country get more money if it has more trees.

[Terry]

very interesting guys, I think this proposal should be discussed on much higher level, seriously.

[sasha]

Is there any higher level than this

We are humans, maybe God is a higher level

[Terry]

No what I meant is that this is a good idea, and consequently should be handed in to an international organization, maybe even the UNO.

[Karl.in.eu]

The Eu must have some departments which care about social initiatives, just do a Google search.

[Faw_Peter]

No what I meant is that this is a good idea, and consequently should be handed in to an international organization, maybe even the UNO.

Don't consider me naive, but I'm sure that issue has already been disputed by world organization, and maybe it's even now being implemented, but we don't know, 'cause we are ordinary mortals

[Nicholas]

Such initiative cannot be initiated without a legal support. So there must be some evidence if such projects are being implemented.

[Benn]

Airline companies are those which make millions at the expense of us, consumers. So the state should take actions and charge a higher amount of money.

[Terry]

Airline companies are those which make millions at the expense of us, consumers. So the state should take actions and charge a higher amount of money.

airlines are airlines... they make business just like any other businesses. This year, during the final of American football championship, the company which broadcasted the match made a net profit of 260 million US dollars in a couple of hours.

[Steven]

Airline companies are those which make millions at the expense of us, consumers. So the state should take actions and charge a higher amount of money.

airlines are airlines... they make business just like any other businesses. This year, during the final of American football championship, the company which broadcasted the match made a net profit of 260 million US dollars in a couple of hours.

impressing indeed. USA's liberal economy will kill it, since it allows the rich to get extra-rich. If I was in Obama's Administration, I would charge a half of those 260 million dollars on behalf of USA economy.

[Andrewz]

impressing indeed. USA's liberal economy will kill it, since it allows the rich to get extra-rich. If I was in Obama's Administration, I would charge a half of those 260 million dollars on behalf of USA economy.

you seem to be very authoritive, Steve. Americans don't do that officially, that's why they are called democrats. Big American enteprrises have the same power as small countries.

[Benn]

Air tax could be levied just as an additional tax, in case the government doesn't want to increase for example the VAT. Remember, when one tax is raised, people will look for ways to avoid paying it, while imposing another tax is a good solution.