The wealthiest of people can afford the best. Whether it's expensive steak (red meat), constant travel (flights), or large houses (AC/Heat/Lights), these rich normals are some of the biggest contributers to our global CO2 emissions. According to the Guardian, "In 2010, the most affluent 10% of households emitted 34% of global CO2, while the 50% of the global population in lower income brackets accounted for just 15%. By 2015, the richest 10% were responsible for 49% of emissions against 7% produced by the poorest half of the world’s population." But it's understandable, access to more means more releases. Now how can we counter it? Well it can't be the same as taxes, everyone cutting down the same percent just wouldn't work. Rather, we can find more "expensive" earth friendly options. For example, instead of driving your expensive Mercedes, maybe we invest in a Tesla or other electric powered vehicle. Or instead of going for the red meats, we find alternatives. But cutting down doesn't mean never having, it just means that the constant flights and heat in our lives are leading to an extreme downfall of our Earth.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment … ding-study

The rise of environmental problems is rooted with the structure of social problems. According to The London School of economics and political science (2017), rich household make up 12 metric tons of CO2 a year on just driving cars, which is about 8 month for an entire lower income family household. It is estimate that one dollar spent on gasoline creates 3.7 kilograms of carbon dioxide, lower income families have less money to spend of gasoline unlike richer families. The highest in come homes spent 3300 dollars on gas producing 12 metric tons while lower income families only produced 3.6 total. This statistic is also true as in 2009 the 10% of higher income families produced three times as much CO2 as the 10% lowest income families. This doesn't fully mean that higher income families contribute the most to global warming, even though the more financially stable produce more household carbon, lower income families invest and use up carbon services. 7% of lower income goes toward utilities contributing to the over all foot print by 42%, while 4% of richer families income go toward utilities, contributing to 42% of the carbon foot print. In concludes, the article published by The London School of Economics and Political Science, explains that higher income families are responsible for producing more Carbon admissions, but lower income families are more restricted to not be able to change.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute … -8-months/

The connection between income and carbon emissions are very linked. according to iea.org the top 1% of the world are 1000 times the impact of lower class people. having a higher income usually makes your carbon footprint go exponentially higher. the top 10% of people were responsible for over half of all of the carbon emissions recorded last year. I think it can be caused because people with a higher income have more opportunity to have a larger carbon footprint because they can afford the amenities that create emissions https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-wo … e-bottom-1

I agree with you, Carbon emissions are indeed connected with income,Like on scientific America, the top percent of people by income produce over 73 tons of carbon dioxide per person annually and in Asia and Europe the top earners exert 29-39 tons of carbon dioxide. Also the bottom 50 percent of North Americans emit 10 tons per person annually and In Europe and East Asia, the same category of earners release 5 tons and 3 tons, respectively. I think the wealthier they are the bigger there footprint will be because they spend more and travel more.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti … hy-people/