zlacker

>>matthe+(OP)
I worry about "tax thing I don't like" policies as then government is dependent on that revenue and now ... you to some extent want that activity to occur otherwise you've got budget issues. Now what is the incentive? Do you adjust taxes to eliminate it or does the state try to keep that revenue stream going?

I also wonder if somehow we're trying to seriously reduce advertising what that does to land of the internet where the users of the internet seem to choose / want "free" advertising based products. I'm not convinced folks just suddenly pay and upending that entire economy maybe a serious net negative.

>>duxup+md
It is not tax "things I don't like".

It is tax things that has macro dynamic negative externalities.

And subsidize things that has positive macro dynamic externalities.

>>tossan+ke
I think it's safe to say the proposition here is that advertising is something the author doesn't like, for reasons, but the same problem remains then. Now the state is profiting from it.

>>duxup+ng
That is a fair criticism of this kind of thing in general, but in this particular case I wanted to combine the Pigovian "tax the bads" idea with the more modern idea of a feebate, which is intentionally revenue neutral (to the Government) in that the fees levied on the "bad" side of the ledger go to pay subsidies or other incentives on the "good" side of the ledger.