Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CptHammer_ t1_jeh1273 wrote

>I wasn't the one who said carbon credits were a tax in air.

I also did not say this. Are you ok?

I'm pretty sure you're now pointing your insults at yourself.

I implied companies are selling air in the form of carbon credits. Wikipedia agrees with me, but I'll concede it's a source that should be edited by you if you don't agree with us. I'm not an expert as you're implying you are. I've deferred to your expertise twice and you had this to say:

>you look liek an absolute moron right now, ya?

People that concede to your expertise are morons? I withdraw my concession at your insistence. Now we're back to square one, companies have started to sell air you breath.


RuinLoes t1_jeh1dol wrote

Ph wow, that is both not what you said and even dumber.

Carbon credits are a way to subsidize maximum quotas.

You have it dead ass backwards. They have to buy carbon credits, and there is a hard cap on the industry overall.

You really are not bright, are you.


CptHammer_ t1_jeh4dvs wrote

>They have to buy carbon credits,

You don't think they pass that cost onto the consumer?

>and there is a hard cap on the industry overall.

Yes, making a carbon credit a valuable commodity. When one company makes a business decision that happens to align with reduced carbon output they earn a credit which they are allowed to sell. They are selling air pollution indulgences like the catholic church. There are literally companies created to mine carbon credits.

Another company buys the credit so the net pollution savings is zero if a credit didn't have to go through an exchange which can limit the exchange rate. It's still really close to zero because of the added industry of the exchange bureaucracy, if not actually creating more pollution.

In the end they are trading air rights, specifically the right to pollute it. Then if a government buys the credit they tax to pay for it. If a business buys a credit they add it to their overhead costs which 100% gets passed to the customer.

Since the entire carbon credits scheme is neutral at best the result is they are selling air.

It seems like we're 100% back on the same page since you've acknowledged carbon credits must be purchased. I've only explained how business works.


RuinLoes t1_jeh54su wrote

Holy shit.

Like, i can't give you anymore. You just fundamentally don't understand what "maxium" means.

Credits are a negative sum. If a company has creddits to sell, it means they came in under THE MAXIMUM QUOTA.

They are not selling the ability to pollute more, they are selling the balance left of their regulatory limit.

I cannot help you. You are just so fucking dumb.