Monday, April 29, 2013
On Kyoto, Cap and Trade, Etc.
a) The climatic impact of each would be minimal (hell, even the protagonists of them admit it now) and b) the effect on the economy could potentially be ruinous (just take a look at what happened to Spain).............So, why are there still people out there advocating in favor of them? It would probably be best for me to just quote Maryland Senator, Ben Cardin, here, "Cap and Trade is most significant revenue generating proposal of our time."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Cap & Trade is one of the dumbest
sops to the free market: the goal
is to reduce certain pollutants, the result is a pollutant commodity market among traders.
A better marketing approach might be public opinion...the recent plant in West, TX ignoring regulation and storing 1300 tons
ammonium nitrate in a haphazard manner. Not sure how many fertilizer plant explosions it takes, but sooner or later.....
So... it is revealed, it is all about greed. Those in control trying to find another yet way to rob from us.
And this little piece of straight-talk from former Obama budget-director, Peter Orszag, "If you didn't auction the permits, it would represent the largest corporate welfare program that has ever been enacted in the history of the United States. All of the evidence suggests that what would occur is that corporate profits would increase by approximately the value of the permits."
BB: When I first heard of cap-and-trade for actual pollutants (instead of plain ol' carbon), my first thought is that it was a bad idea to buy the rights to pollute.
Will: As for what Orszag said, what amount is he talking about? Would it be larger than the $40 billion Obama handed to a couple of wealthy auto industry? Or the hundreds of billions in a gift to the banks that GWB, Obama, and the Democrats gave? That's some massive corporate welfare already.
I don't have the exact amounts but, yes, I believe that a giving away of those permits would have exceeded even those policies.
Post a Comment