• lemmus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 months ago

    Great target. Banning private jets has got to be one of the easiest climate wins possible. Zero consequences for ordinary people, and doesn’t outright prevent anyone from flying.

  • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    I know one of those protestors, that’s weird to see them on my Lemmy feed. They’re an absolute mess and I really can’t have anything to do with them, but I support this protest more than anything else they’ve ever done.

  • GroundedGator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    There should be a tax based on how many gallons of fuel per person on the flight. The tax should grow experimentally related to that ratio. Crew and staff should be excluded. Sorry it’s going to be 90,000$ for you to take off today. Maybe even double the tax every time you have to pay the tax on a single month. 90,000 this week, 180,000 next. Resets every month or maybe every quarter.

    Eventually an airline for the super wealthy would form. Cheaper than owning your own jet but afford some level of privacy and exclusivity by doing group bookings to lower or eliminate the tax.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      You don’t know who you’re dealing with. They’d be labeled as crew so fast, then the flight would be tax free lol

      • GroundedGator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I meant that the crew would not count as passengers. I know nothing about fuel usage, but let’s say a trip is going to use 200lbs of fuel. 1 passenger would give a ratio of 200:1, add 6 crew, the ratio is still 200:1. The only way to have lower tax is to have more passengers on the flight.