Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Every good a poor person buys is shipped by fuel though?

Edit: And the rich are more likely to be able to afford electric vehicles and appliances

_and_ they of course are more likely to be able to take a hit to their finances and an upsurge in costs.

The difference between going to the movies less and having to weigh getting all the food you need or all the toiletries you need is obviously quite large.



There's no doubt they help the poor a _little bit_ .

The question is whether there exist alternative solutions that help the poor a lot more by not wasting so much helping the rich (or especially in this case - those buying and selling fossil fuels, industries we'd prefer to be slowing down rather than encouraging with tax breaks).

Eg if the same money "spent" on this tax break had instead been a invested in raising the minimum income tax ceiling, benefits, and pensions (by equivalent amounts), it would presumably have gotten more money into the pockets of those most hurt by fuel inflation, which was the claimed goal of the change, but done less to benefit the fossil fuel industry and those who don't really need tax breaks.

Or to go more extreme you could add an untaxed fuel ration (there is a shortage after all), paid for by higher taxes on extreme usage, thus reducing overuse and increasing affordability at the same time. But that's practically communism, so can't possibly be done (to be fair, it'd be very expensive to implement, so not sure it's a serious suggestion).


To be fair, this is exactly what the TFA suggests:

> Policymakers have mostly responded to the shock with broad-based price-suppressing measures, including subsidies, tax reductions, and price controls.

> Going forward, the policy emphasis should shift rapidly towards allowing price signals to operate more freely and providing income relief to the vulnerable.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: