Bill Gates Demands Governments Skyrocket Taxes To Shut Down Entire Industries

( The World Economic Forum went ahead with its annual conference this week, hosting a digital summit after canceling original plans for world leaders to gather in Davos, Switzerland.

During a discussion with Microsoft founder Bill Gates, the billionaire philanthropist argued that rich countries must play a “central role” in implementing aggressive carbon taxes and forcing middle-income nations to shift their approach to economic growth.

Gates said that carbon taxes should be used to “drive the demand” for clean products.”

He argued that only an aggressive approach would convince developing economies to make significant changes.

“The number of companies working on these things is very exciting,” he said.

And while many people would argue that shifting to more sustainable sources of energy – including Tesla founder Elon Musk – the idea that taxing economies to make that change is a controversial move that former President Donald Trump already proved is unnecessary.

Gates also revealed a flaw in his plan, admitting that “some of them will fail, a lot of them will fail,” before insisting that only a “reasonable number” need to succeed in order for change to occur.

The original plan for this year’s WEF Annual Meeting was for presidents and prime ministers to meet with global business leaders in Switzerland – and while the event was shifted to a virtual conference instead, the in-person event is still expected to take place in the early summer instead.

Professor Klaus Schwab, the founder and chairman of the WEF, said that the deferral of the in-person meeting would “not prevent progress through continued digital convening of leaders from business, government and civil society.”

The idea of a carbon tax has been widely criticized. In 2019, a number of notable economists including 27 Novel laureates and four former chairs of the Federal Reserve called on Western governments to adopt the idea – but Philip Magness of the American Institute for Economic Research said that the proposal “carries the substantial risk of becoming a cumbersome supplement to existing regulations rather than a replacement.”