Hacker News Reader

Comment by makerofspoons | Hacker News Reader

I propose Amazon and consumers pay for the environmental damage shipping these products using fossil fuels causes.

We actually have a system in place to do exactly this.

The EPA + Taxes (of various kinds) are how companies/individuals pay for environmental damage, and it's also how companies/individuals pay to protect the environment.

Cleanups use tax money, research into potential regulations to minimize impact uses tax money, etc.

So it's not some kind of outlandish idea, but at the moment the EPA is REALLY buddy/buddy with large companies so they're currently effectively neutered.

I think the parent post is talking about something more like a carbon tax, which we don’t have in place.

Good luck calculating that!

If you do, make sure to offset that with: (1) the reduction in retail space use for products, (2) the reduced amount of cars on the road, etc. etc.

Not to mention, even after you somehow take into affect all of the various variables at play here, they can easily claim you miscalculated and just wave off the concerns "Oh Amazon is a Green Initiative Company™.... blah blah blah"

Look into carbon tax proposals if you’re interested in learning about it.

Have you never heard of a carbon tax?

If we added a carbon tax to the sale of gas (ideally paid depending on how efficient your car is, but that's a pipe dream), then we wouldn't have to consider the reduced amount of cars on the road because Amazon would save that much money by not paying it when they don't drive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com