Posted on 12/21/2015 6:54:06 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Huffington Post has a plan to address the as yet unanswered question of who will foot the bill, for the renewable transformation green advocates want, in the wake of the Paris COP21 agreement. HuffPost’s suggestion is a $2.9 trillion rise in annual taxes on fossil fuels.
How Can We Pay for the New Energy Economy?
Many a great idea has been deflated by a simple question: “That’s nice, but who’s going to pay for it?†That question hovered like a cloud over the international climate conference in Paris a week ago. Simply put, the goal of the agreement at that conference is to build a world in which we achieve and sustain universal prosperity without plummeting into a future of irreversible climate catastrophe. It’s a great goal, but who is going to pay for it?
…
Fossil Energy Subsidies: Some government subsidies go to energy consumers and some to energy producers. Some are direct – tax breaks, for example – and some are indirect “post tax†subsidies, including the social and environmental costs of using fossil fuels. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), direct and indirect subsidies around the world are expected to total $5.3 trillion this year.
…
The IMF notes that the benefits of reforming fossil energy subsidies are “potentially enormousâ€. “Eliminating post-tax subsidies in 2015 could raise government revenue by $2.9 trillion (3.6% of global GDP), cut global CO2 emissions by more than 20% and cut premature air pollution deaths by more than half,†it says.
In addition, Huffpost thinks we should place an unspecified price on CO2.
Putting a Price on Carbon: The principal reason that climate change has become the world’s biggest market failure is that the energy market’s price signals are broken. Government subsidies keep energy prices artificially low. Moreover, the prices we pay at the pump and electric meter do not include the cost of damages that carbon fuels do to public health, the environment and so on.
…
The most common argument against carbon pricing is that it would kill jobs and cripple the economy, but actual experience shows this is not necessarily the case. One example is found in the nine U.S. states whose carbon trading I cited above. Between 2009 and 2013, their economies reportedly grew more than 9% compared to 8.8% in the other 41 states, while their combined carbon emissions dropped 14%. The net economic benefit to the region’s economy was $1.3 billion.
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-s-becker/how-can-we-pay-for-the-ne_b_8845586.html
Taxing our way to prosperity – the green solution to the global climate “crisisâ€.
Is it time to start locking liberals in cages yet?
Let the little people pay for it.
Ping.
The wealthy globalists certainly won’t feel the pinch.
We're about forty years late on just locking them in cages.
Leave it to liberals to come up with hair brained schemes and fuzzy math. Taxes on everything, especially anything that has to do with fuel(or cigarettes and booze.) Just tax the crap out of the ‘’rich people’’ and then give it to the ‘’poor people’’ and....(wait for it..) No one is any richer and most folks are still poor or fast approaching it.
fyi
Haha!
That's like drinking your way to sobriety.
Those morons don’t realize that the money comes out of hardworking Americans’ pockets.
They will destroy the market and plunge the world into darkness if they are not stopped.
Some years back someone asked this: When was the last time a nation taxed itself to prosperity? It’s like standing in a bucket & trying to lift yourself by the handle.
Those carbon taxes will be wasted by the left. Today’s WSJ had an article on how companies which promised to develop biofuels that the Obama administration touted and gave our tax money to fared over the past 7 years.
Two or three got grants or subsidized loans ranging from 50 million to 100 million to make green fuel from grass, yeast or algae. None could compete with carbon based gas or diesel prices.
So they gave up and are trying to sell upscale green oil products like skin cream @ $50 for 3 0z. or cooking oil @ $18 for 16 oz. Not much of a business plan for all that wasted tax money.
I’m Speechless, the jerks are unbelievable.
How about they cut the budget instead, starting with their own stinking jobs?
Thanks Ernest.
Thanks Ernest.
You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.
Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me
Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.
California Governor Hails ‘Coercive Power of Government’
Global Warming on Free Republic here, here, and here
You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.
Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me
Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.
California Governor Hails ‘Coercive Power of Government’
Global Warming on Free Republic here, here, and here
One example is found in the nine U.S. states whose carbon trading I cited above. Between 2009 and 2013, their economies reportedly grew more than 9% compared to 8.8% in the other 41 states, while their combined carbon emissions dropped 14%. The net economic benefit to the region’s economy was $1.3 billion.
Where is the peer reviewed science?
Really, no other factors for this growth? How exactly did it contribute to the growth? Federal money?
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.