While the pro-cap and taxers continue whining – let your representatives in Washington know what you think!
Predictably, those who support cap and tax are continuing their outrageous claims of job creation using gross numbers, and not the net of what would be left over after they start hammering the economy.
Well, while they’re complaining, take a moment to let your Senators know what you think about your utility rates going up, your cost of gasoline going up, and the cost of food increasing because it will become more expensive to produce.
I think that means my daily diet coke will now go up to $2 a bottle, since it’s going to cost more to haul to the convenience store as well:
While supporters of cap-and-trade tout the bill as a step towards cutting carbon dioxide emissions from our atmosphere, everyone – from farmers to truckers to airline pilots to small businesses – will end up footing the bill for this poorly designed legislation. Prices for gasoline, diesel, airline fuel, and home heating oil will increase – even though the Government’s own data shows that this hidden tax will produce almost no reduction in CO2 emissions from the transportation sector. Farmers, truckers, delivery services, small businesses, freight haulers, airlines, railroads, shipping, and others would face higher fuel costs because of this hidden tax, which could limit an economic recovery that just might be on the horizon.
Nearly everyone agrees that the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill will cost American jobs. According to the non-partisan Brookings Institution, “Despite the promise of green jobs, ACESA would, if enacted, inevitably depress total employment from baseline levels. The bill would divert resources now used to produce additional goods and services into the work of obtaining energy from sources that are more costly than fossil fuels.”
Documents recently obtained from the Treasury Department through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed that the Obama Administration itself is envisioning a huge cost to taxpayers and the economy from cap-and-trade. One memo concluded that “Given the Administration’s proposal to auction all emission allowances, a cap-and-trade program could generate federal receipts on the order of $100 to $200 billion annually.” That’s equivalent to as much as $1,800 per household per year, or a 15 percent across-the-board increase in the personal income tax. Some estimates run a $1,000 higher, or even more.
Read it all here at the National Taxpayer’s Union, and CLICK HERE to let our Senators know what you think!
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Denature,
You want to have it both ways. You claim that “green endergy” will create NET jobs in another post and then you claim here that is the “economic cost of inaction against global warming.” Intellectual honesty requires one to be consistent. You seem to be unable to do so within hours.
This style permeates the justification for cap and trade. It gives me absolutaly no confidence this is nothing but a political ideology position devoid of rational thinking.
I think Dusty Johnson, Todd Schlekeway and Dan Lederman are doing a great job addressing this issue for SD!
John Thune also!
Cap and Trade is a joke. I am not against “green energy” I am against bad legislation that does not solve an issue. Why not have incentives to cut carbon output? Where are the incentives to plant trees?
If you think that China will not be burning coal you are wrong. What has made America great is, Freedom, abundant natural resources, and cheap energy! The Government is normally a hinderance not a help. People create jobs and not the Government. If we forget that, this Country is in huge trouble.
re: Troy Jones.
Huh? I pointed out PP misrepresented 4 studies performed by actual economists, including one in which he cited numbers that aren’t actually to be found anywhere in the study. Additionally, I pointed out that he claimed Obama through the EPA denied a permit to Big Stone II that was actually granted in June. Which of these points do you find false?
Cap and Trade is a ‘change as you go’ tax. Nothing will ever change the temperature of the earth other than the sun. Or does a temperature between -128 degree F to +135 degree F from a burning ball of gas 95 million miles away have little significance when the earths mean temperature changed 5 degree celcius in the last 10 years; and maybe 1 degree in the last 100 years?
The argument for “man-made” global warming is ONLY political! If you don’t believe me go ask Al Gores electric bill.
Thus far on this topic, you’ve misrepresented conclusions from an MIT study and the CBO. You’ve also claimed the Obama administration killed the permit for Big Stone II when the permit was granted in June. Maybe you put forth a rational presentation this time.
Not so much. Like every study you’ve mentioned, the Brookings Institution explicitly states they are not doing a cost benefit analysis. They ignored the economic costs of inaction against global warming. To keep yammering about net vs. gross and leaving out the economic impacts of inaction is disingenuous. It will be more expensive to do nothing. That includes the economic impacts to farmers in South Dakota.
You also chose to ignore the Brookings Institution’s statement that “most studies suggest that
the effects on output and employment over the long
run should be modest.”
Treasury department. Sigh. Not only do you cite studies that don’t say what you claim they do. You cite supposed studies that don’t even agree with your previously touted numbers. The $1,800 per household figure is made up. It’s not in the report. It was made up by a blogger. The blogger analysis doesn’t even actually apply to the current bill. Actual treasury analysis is in reality along the lines of previous projections put out by the EIA, EPA, and CBO. What are those effects again? Right, modest. And do they take into account the economic impact of inaction? That’s right, they don’t. Actual real life media outlets that carried this fluff had to issue corrections. How about you?