• 3 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 8th, 2023

help-circle





  • The solution is simple: hefty meat tax.

    Government has tremendous power to address collective action problems through incentives, regulations, and taxation. In the world of public health, these interventions are ranked on a scale called the Nuffield Ladder, with gentle nudges at the bottom and outright bans at the top. One of the most commonly used tools is taxation. In particular, governments can implement what are known as Pigouvian taxes on things like sugary drinks, tobacco, or polluting factories—the idea is to force producers to cover the cost of the harms their products do. They can also slap so-called “sin taxes” on products to increase direct costs for consumers. These taxes work. Numerous studies show that these are very effective in decreasing consumption, leading groups like the World Health Organization to strongly support them. The academic case for such taxes on meat is robust and convincing. But taxes in general are massively politically unpopular and lead to accusations of a nanny state interfering in consumers’ free choice, as the battles over sugar taxes around the world have shown.






  • No, the fact that Masha Gessen won the award and was consistently supported by the prize givers suggests otherwise.

    edit: I think the reason I’m being downvoted is because the article unclearly refers to the “foundation” as pulling support. That Foundation was the venue for giving the award, not the org giving the award. The org giving the award steadfastly supported Gessen. My point is that, despite massive pressure from the venues hosting the award ceremony (which must be condemned), the good folks who give the Hannah Arendt prize would, in-fact quality Hannah Arendt for the Hannah Arendt prize in 2023 – because they continue to stand-by her legacy and refuse to be pressured against her values.