i don't drive, and my carbon footprint is extremely low. my biggest crime is importing fruit, but imports are exempt from the tax, which is part of the reason it's not likely to be effective.

if i start noticing the price of food go up, i might react differently, but i don't expect that to happen.

so, this isn't really going to cost me anything, because i didn't need to be hit over the head with a tax to be responsible - i already was, and i would be anyways.

so, i'm not going to react because i don't expect to get hit, anyways.

but, the way it's designed is going to disproportionately affect low income voters with outstanding debts. if you're a cab driver with an outstanding loan, for example, you're going to get nailed, and you're not going to get it back. it is consequently correct to label this a tax on poor people, even if it's as a consequence of a poor design rather than a malicious ploy.

normally, when the conservatives make arguments like this, it's based on a misunderstanding of the policy, because the liberals are smart enough to see it coming and make the proper adjustments ahead of time. not so, here - the expected naive & wrong attack is actually going to be correct.

it's one thing to take a risk like this on a policy that's probably not going to work. it's another to completely fuck it up....

so, how many people are going to get an unpleasant surprise in the mail? and how is that going to affect voting decisions?