[Rockingham]

As a matter of economic and administrative efficiency, a carbon tax is superficially superior to cap and trade and other intrusive regulatory schemes. Yet the advantage is likely to be mostly illusory because a carbon tax would also involve many subjective and politically charged assessment calculations that would install a new layer of federal regulation and oversight into every nook and cranny of economic life.

Moreover, the political plum on offer to the general public is guaranteed annual cash that would give rise to a great deal of fraud and to political agitation that the payment be increased for the poor and denied to the "the rich" based on a means test. Finally, there is reason to suspect that this scheme is intended for not just the US but for all of the world, with the UN as the overall administrator.

Instead of a carbon tax, why not look to advanced nuclear power and to geoengineering to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide? Enviros categorically oppose both, which suggests both that they do not fear global warming as much as they claim and that they do not so much want solutions as more power for themselves based on a supposed environmental emergency.

[piasa]

Maybe their idea really has nothing to do with reducing emissions and is just a sneaky effort to compensate for the already spent social security fund rather than admit to people that the money they thought was being set aside for them as they earned it was whizzed away years ago..