Anyway, I think we've seen enough uninformed attempted trashing of the science. Tax or no tax, and whether or not you believe it's a workable solution to reducing emissions, it is
not going to cost mass jobs in the aviation industry.
What amazes me is that we observe much talk about "alarmism" yet in the same sentence cry that "we're all gonna be ruined" because a tax is levied on certain parts of industry. The truth virtually never resembles this. Industry has a history of screaming blue murder then quietly adjusting to the circumstances, and will do so again. Eg, the CFC phaseout which was going to single-handedly destroy the worldwide refrigeration industry - which was still alive and thriving last time I ordered a beer - just for the sake of a lousy layer of stratospheric ozone which stops us being completely fried by UV radiation from the sun.
The planet will also adjust to the reality of having very large amounts of greenhouse gases pumped into its atmosphere in a very short space of geological time as a consequence of human industrialisation.
It will warm up with many associated consequences some of which are likely to be very difficult to manage. Unless we discover new laws of physics, it simply doesn't have a choice and quibbling over the minutiae
is not worth your time.
This whole debate is running much the same course, though probably over a different time scale, as the smoking/lung cancer/tobacco debate. Right now we're where that debate was in the 60s and 70s: the science is accumulating substantial evidence that it's not such a good thing, the industry is fighting tooth and nail to deny that there's an issue, and many people are choosing to just ignore it because they don't want to change their habits or they have more important things to worry about right now.
Ultimately though, just as in that scenario and many others, we humans may end up suffering for our ignorance.
But the aviation industry will still be here in some form or another.