Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 11/01/2009 7:59:47 AM PST by opentalk
There's much debate about the efficacy of controlling pollutants with economic incentives, also known as cap-and-trade. Its advocates dress it up with a lot of moral indignation. Cap-and-trade would not achieve its goals—and it would put America on a ruinous course. Here's why:
The price tag would be huge. Cap-and-trade would raise prices for the energy we get from natural gas, coal, and oil. Putting a tax on carbon means that every American who flips a light switch, turns a car key, or buys anything made or shipped in this country will pay more. The Treasury Department estimates that the president's cap-and-trade approach would "generate federal receipts on the order of $100 [billion] to $200 billion annually"; the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports that a 15 percent CO2 reduction would cost an average household $1,600 a year. Other experts say the price tag could be much higher. That would mean utility bills will rise everywhere, exploding in some parts of the country. Ratepayers in manufacturing states (with higher per capita energy use) and in states that depend more heavily on coal for electricity would see their utility bills soar, slowing economic growth and job creation.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Thought experiment: Do you think the Pelosi democrat congress would have the slightest interest in a bill designed to control CO2 emissions that didn’t result in a tax or the ability to reward their favorite constituencies?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
Go bankrupt...and we'll own you just like GM.
They're insane!!
The amazing part is that Newsweek would carry such a sensible opinion piece from Karl Rove. I guess they see their reader base dwindling and have decided that if nearly 2/3 of Americans reject the ridiculous premise of anthropogenic global warming, despite relentless propoganda from the MSM, it might be a good idea to print something that doesn’t pander to the Green Cult. I only hope the Washington elites are paying attention.
I was listening to some pundant say that between take over of the financial institutes, auto and health care, the federal government now will control 48% of the economy. Cap and Trade will take them even further into nationalized control.
I agree, but there’s an important tactical point that does not require even debating the validity of AGW.
As Rove says, even the best results “would have a negligible worldwide impact.”
It doesn’t do anything about it’s stated purpose. Why spend trillions to do nothing? (We know the answer, but I want all voters to ask themselves the question.)
Tactically, there’s no need to debate global warming and it’s unnecessary and foolish to make the bill a referendum on it when it fails on its own merits and by its own measurement.
I've been asked to discuss the issue of global warming to a group of kids (13-19 years old) who are showing an interests in politics. The links you provided will be very helpful.
I'd like to throw in some humor and would appreciate anything else you (or anyone) might have that would help. Looking through the global warming keyword articles are quite helpful in itself.
They have been the party of Goldman Sachs (and AIG) going back to the Klinton years.
Excellent! Thanks.
The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet |
I have my work cut out for me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.