Text 1: Climate economist Doyle argues that carbon taxes are the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By pricing the external cost of carbon into every transaction, the tax lets markets decide where reductions are cheapest, achieving climate goals at minimum economic cost.
Text 2: Climate economist Park does not deny carbon taxation's theoretical efficiency but argues that its political fragility makes it ill-suited to the climate emergency. Carbon taxes have repeatedly been weakened or repealed under public pressure; durable policy may require less elegant tools — clean-energy mandates, public investment — that are harder to undo. Efficiency that cannot survive politics, Park argues, is a thin victory.
Based on the texts, how would Park (Text 2) most likely respond to Doyle's case for carbon taxes?
- A
She would deny that carbon taxes can affect markets.
- B
She would agree that economic efficiency is the only criterion.
- Ccheck_circle
She would accept the theoretical case but argue that political durability matters more for actual emissions outcomes.
- D
She would propose abandoning all climate policy.
Explanation
Park grants Doyle's economic argument but elevates political durability as the binding constraint. B captures this. A, C, and D misrepresent her position.