Which is why the most suggested thing I've seen is taxing carbon and then distributing that evenly to all citizens. Anyone using less than the mean would benefit (which would cover the lowest earners because they're least likely to have cars and high energy use), while also having everyone incentivised to lower usage (which also means you can set the rates even higher).

> Normal every day citizens end up footing the bill for corporations.

Corporations are made of people. It's all just people doing things. Taxing anything is always taxing people which is a non-interesting statement.

Redistribution would not nearly be enough to offset the economic damage to the lower class. A big percentage will be lost to bureaucracy. Inflation would skyrocket. Those with assets see all the benefit of inflation, while the poor people with no assets have their purchasing power eroded away. Housing will become even less affordable. There's no free lunch.

> Corporations are made of people. It's all just people doing things. Taxing anything is always taxing people which is a non-interesting statement.

This is a ridiculous point. Surely you understand the different between things like income, sales, estate, capital gains, and corporate taxes? They all affect radically different individuals. I absolutely do not think that poor people should pay to clean the earth for the elites.

…and those citizens would be incentivized to pursue alternatives: car-pooling, biking, public transit, walking, EVs, along with the public/private investment in those modes.

Making it costlier for consumers and corporations to pollute the environment so that they change their practices to more sustainable options is the whole point of the carbon tax.

You're missing the point. It would deeply widen the already large gap between the upper and lower classes. And the worst part: it still wouldn't fix the problem. The really carbon expensive aspects of society come from industrialization. Fossil fuels are not "optional". Without them none of the global supply chains would function. VERY few would have electricity in their homes.

Building infrastructure would be insanely expensive to build with a carbon tax.

> Production and distribution prices increase for every good/service consumed

That sounds like a feature as consumption is one of the core problems.

> Normal every day citizens end up footing the bill for corporations

Corporations are serving demand. You could say citizens end up paying a more accurate cost for their consumption, with environmental costs properly accounted for.

And we could redistribute the tax revenue back to the citizens, starting with those who are suffering most and are least responsible for the climate emergency.

That's trivial to fix by giving poor folks $5K each and then it's their choice if they want to spend it on gas. Aka a subsidy for not buying gas.

You can (and should) debate what the exact numbers should be, but we already do this today with tax credits and welfare for the poor. It's a a solved problem.

> That's trivial to fix by giving poor folks $5K each and then it's their choice if they want to spend it on gas. Aka a subsidy for not buying gas.

See my sibling comment. This is dramatically underestimating the economic damage to those with lower income. Literally everything will become more expensive. Things like food, housing, infrastructure, medical care...

> ...but we already do this today with tax credits and welfare for the poor. It's a a solved problem.

Hey man, if you've solved our carbon emissions problem no strings attached you'll have changed the world. How are the current tax credits and welfare systems "solved"? Social Security is expected to collapse in the within 15 years.