all questions
Mw E

Mw E April 7, 2025, 5:36 p.m.

Climate tech subscriptions becoming mandatory - would you pay a monthly carbon offset fee?

Just read that Switzerland is considering implementing mandatory "climate contributions" for all citizens starting next year. Basically a monthly fee based on your estimated carbon footprint.

Apparently several other European countries watching closely to see how it goes, with potential global rollout within 5 years. The article mentioned fees ranging from €15-75/month depending on income level and lifestyle choices.

I'm all for addressing climate change, but something about FORCED monthly payments feels different than voluntary actions. Plus the whole system seems ripe for corruption - who exactly gets this money and how do we know it's actually offsetting anything?

Not sure if this is brilliant policy or government overreach masked as environmentalism. Would you willingly pay a monthly climate fee if it became mandatory where you live? How would you even verify the money goes toward actual climate solutions?

tz07021979t

tz07021979t April 7, 2025, 10:19 p.m.

hahaha yeah sure government needs ANOTHER way to take my money. We already pay gas taxes, electricity taxes, import taxes, etc - all supposedly "for the environment." total scam. They'll collect billions and plant like 3 trees while administrators get rich

↪ Reply
- ♥ 2 +
ReM1X

ReM1X April 8, 2025, 12:40 a.m.

Important context - our proposal includes significant rebates for lower income households and rural communities. Progressive scale ensures corporations and wealthy pay proportionally more. Projected 78% public support in latest polling. American media presenting distorted version

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
Valentyne

Valentyne April 8, 2025, 1:23 p.m.

monthly fee = fine, as long as TRANSPARENT about exactly where money flows. current carbon offset market basically modern day indulgences - rich paying to sin without consequences. needs independent verification or just another greenwashing mechanism

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
parlament111

parlament111 April 8, 2025, 9:31 p.m.

Look at ACTUAL carbon emissions by source before forming opinion. Individual carbon footprints = fraction of industrial/military emissions. Targeting regular people while letting corporations pollute freely = classic misdirection. Fix policy upstream not downstream

↪ Reply
- ♥ 1 +
totally

totally April 9, 2025, 1:26 a.m.

torn on this. Voluntary carbon offsets proven ineffective (only 2% participation rate globally), but mandatory fees without lifestyle changes just taxation. Needs balance of incentives AND penalties to work effectively. Not inherently against idea

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
:)"~

:)"~ April 10, 2025, 7:42 p.m.

Mandatory fee without concrete emission reduction plan just wealth redistribution under green banner. Show me DETAILED roadmap for carbon neutrality by specific date for my money

↪ Reply
- ♥ 2 +
l_detonator

l_detonator April 10, 2025, 11:50 p.m.

asking governments to show "detailed roadmaps" while planet literally burning around us = peak privilege mentality. Perfect shouldn't be enemy of good enough. Start somewhere, refine later

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
aik.jackson

aik.jackson April 11, 2025, 11:43 p.m.

As someone working in carbon exchange markets, public misunderstanding about additionality requirements has undermined confidence in legitimate offset programs. Properly regulated offset systems actually do deliver measurable climate benefits when verification standards enforced

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
sdff

sdff April 15, 2025, 3:11 p.m.

Singapore implemented similar program last year ($45 monthly average). Result? Zero measurable reduction in emissions, massive administrative bureaucracy, and several corruption scandals. Policy needs complete redesign focusing on industrial polluters not individuals

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
aventador

aventador April 21, 2025, 8:36 p.m.

ethical question nobody addressing: what happens to those who refuse/can't pay? carbon debtors prison? restricted travel? social credit penalties? slippery slope when government mandates payments tied to "moral" behavior. dangerous precedent regardless of climate benefits

↪ Reply
- ♥ +
SHINE

SHINE April 27, 2025, 12:14 a.m.

My company introduced voluntary carbon fee ($20/month) two years ago. 97% employee participation + company matching = funded local wetland restoration, community solar, and EV chargers. Tangible results we can literally see from office window. Changed my perspective completely

↪ Reply
- ♥ +