-->
@spacetime
This is an interesting idea, which would mitigate a lot of the harm. But not all of the harm. And I also don't think it's politically realistic to believe that American politicians would choose to sacrifice a major source of tax revenue like that.
(1) I mean, it’s politically unrealistic to believe that American politicians would institute a carbon tax at all. Gas tax holidays are very popular. The question is whether it should be done.
(2) I think the remaining harm would be outweighed by the mitigation effects on climate change. Moreover, subsidies on clean energy would offset even more of the harm. On your “theoretical models” point, (a) theoretical models are often pretty good at predicting what happens in the real world and (b) empirical research from Australia, if I recall correctly, also confirms this.
Social cohesion is an absolute necessity for the long-term sustainability of democratic governance (and autocratic governance too, for that matter). I don't see how it's worth sacrificing social cohesion for a decrease in consumer prices.
I don’t buy that the effects of immigration on social cohesion are so destructive that they significantly damage the long-term sustainability of democratic governance. I definitely think the effect immigration has on creating jobs and thus alleviating poverty outweigh the smaller impacts of immigrants on social cohesion, particularly given that groups of immigrants are highly likely to form and live within their own communities. Even if they don’t, there’s also some academic literature suggesting that diversity brings with it its own share of social and economic benefits (consider contact hypothesis and research about the economic effects of diversity).
I don't think countries have any obligations to noncitizens, other than to treat them with basic human decency (i.e. don't inflict gratuitous suffering upon them). Development aid is only good insofar as it advances our national security interests.
I don’t necessarily share that view. I guess we have competing value systems here.
Because it has no basis in reality. I see no evidence for the notion that racism, sexism, or other forms of oppression are widespread within American society. It's all just empty victimhood mongering. All it does is breed a delusional sense of resentment among women and racial minorities. It's a massive disservice to them and to society as a whole.
Okay. I’m not nearly as knowledgeable about the US, in particular, as you are, but I’ve seen compelling evidence to the contrary (i.e., evidence that suggests that racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression, such as prejudice against LGBTQ+ people, are quite prevalent even in developed countries). However, I really don’t think it’s deniable that sexism, racism, and similar forms of oppression (e.g., caste-ism in India) are prevalent in the majority of countries in the world (i.e., developing countries).
