Who Do You Know Who Has Said All This?

Via Reason:

Obama has promised that no family earning less than $250,000 per year will pay one dime in higher taxes. But the companies that have to pay for permits will pass that cost on to consumers in the form of higher prices for electricity and other products. So these families will pay $645 billion, only some of which will be returned in the form of lower income taxes, for a system that is terribly inefficient.

The solution, of course, would be a straight-forward tax on carbon, the proceeds to be refunded through the payroll tax system. But unlike the hidden tax of cap-and-trade, a carbon tax is out there for the voters to see. And given the choice between a stealthy tax and a visible tax, politicians will pick the former every time.


  1. Bob Sykes:

    Of course, a 1% reduction in CO2 output is a 1% reduction in industrial and agricultural production and 1% reduction in real income for everyone. The European goal of 20% is the Great Depression all over again. All this for a Lysenkoist fraud.

  2. Allen:

    Nice, very nice

    One of the things that really gets my goat isn't what Obama is doing, although that bugs me more, but a vocal group of people who can't make this connection. They'll preach away left and right about the externalities, the "hidden" costs of sprawl, autos, oil, or whatever they don't like. Yet since Mother Jones nor Krugman nor whatever else they're reading has connected the dots for them on the true costs of cap and trade or the recent jacking of the tobacco tax, they don't realize that tens of millions of people making very little money, let alone $250k+, are getting or going to get hit with a big tax hike.

  3. Fred from Canuckistan . . .:

    In the end, higher prices and additional fees are going to be imposed on ALL American taxpayers to fund the additional government Obama is bringing to your nation.

    Using Carbon as his rationale is simply politics. It is easy to piggyback on the Great Parade the global environmental industry has organized against America.

    Maybe next time he'll use tulips as the cause du jour.

    The good news is there are mid term elections coming and Obamanomics could be a one term disaster in less than four years.

  4. TXJim:

    "Who Do You Know Who Has Said All This?"

    Not sure how to type the word for a coyote's lonesome howl but I'll give it a shot:


  5. Link:

    Cap-and-trade has good "optics" -- it's not a tax, but a way to save the environment.

    Many families who make less than $250k will wind up paying a lot more, just not right away.

    Obama hopes to permanently increase the size of the federal government, by a lot. There was already a big long-term disconnect between federal revenues and expenses -- because of baked-in increases to elderly spending. Over the next few years, Obama wants to make this gap enormous, even by the standard of the federal budget.

    At some point, this will have to be paid for. 39% / 20% on the top few percent won't do it. 100% on the top few percent won't do it. Taxes will have to be raised by a lot ... on a lot of Americans. Ironically, the truly wealthy will find ways to side-step these increases.

    Obama is no Bambi. I think he's diabolical. If this was only about top rates going to 39% and 20%, it'd be a small debate. He's paying for his plans with backdated checks. At some point, Obama will shift "95% vs 5%" to be "65% vs 35%."

    The numbers get a lot worse and sooner, if the overall economy isn't growing at 3 to 4%. Obamanomics will lead to many years of lost growth --- take that Paul Krugman.

    Without growth, we all lose. We're also skating close to the edge of crazy inflation.

    Am I wrong?

  6. Link:

    To Fred from Canuckistan, I fear the following:

    Obama is working to make sure that 2009 sucks but that we'll be out of the recession by 2010 ... just in time for the Stimulus Bill to goose things. He'll then have a huge fund to "make it rain" for key elements of his base. He'll claim credit for whatever modest turnaround we see. Thus, look for the Democrats to solidify their position in 2010.

    Eight years of Bush killed the Republican brand. It's not that the Republicans lost the White House ... it's that they've lost so many seats in Congress that they're no longer an effective opposition party.

    Right now the Republican strategy is to hope that Obama craters the economy in 2010 - 2012 ... and not in later years, which is what I suspect will happen. Not exactly a winning sales pitch ... especially if the world doesn't end in 2009 and we see some improvement in 2010.

    To win in 2010 and 2012, the Republicans must find a principled way to capture the middle -- as Reagan did. As part of this, those who aren't "white Protestant males in fly-over states" can't be made to feel second-class citizens in the party. To be a national party, the Republicans can't just be a party of ditto-heads where the likes of Rush and a handful of evangelicals can veto nominees.

    The Republicans have to win back House and Senate seats in places like Connecticut in 2010 or they can pack it in. Will the Republicans embrace the likes of Larry Kudlow -- who I like -- or find a way to say he's a RINO. Developing ...

  7. TXJim:

    ..."To win in 2010 and 2012, the Republicans must find a principled way to capture the middle — as Reagan did."

    Agree on the need to capture the middle. The question is how? The Republican establishment types (moderates) push the "we gotta lighten up" meme which has the implication that those who need to do the lightening up need to start agreeing with the establishment Conservative 2.0 Lite approach. Ain't gonna work. The establishment has no coherent theme to unify the party which I suspect is not a concern to them. Lest we forget - they despised Reagan. Still do.

    I hope to see the Republican party rebuild based on simple themes rather than continue to try the failed big tent theory. Simple themes based on freedom are what is needed. Every single policy issue can be boiled down to freedom. And freedom is a winning message that has the additional benefit of accomplishing what the big tent theory has never done which is to unite the right side of the political spectrum. Concepts of freedom are universal and work just as well in Connecticut as in Utah.

  8. Link:

    Obama is making a big bet on wind and solar, to cut CO2 emissions. I'm no expert, but can't see how they ever become more than 10% of the mix, given their higher cost and issues with how they support the grid.

    So what am I missing?

    Do Obama's advisors know how to lower the kwh costs of solar and wind so that they're cost effective ... or at least not so expensive that they won't bankrupt our industries? Do we know how to use these technologies to meet peak demand?

    If not, shouldn't we put putting just a modest few billion into more basic research ... to solve these problems first ... rather than building out on the basis of inferior technology?

  9. skh.pcola:

    Advocacy of a cap-and-trade carbon scheme is worshipping the lesser of two evils. Consider that CO2 isn't a pollutant, oil isn't scarce, and that your pride of having been a long-time proponent of this asshattery makes not a whit of difference. Cap-and-trade is just Democrat- and squishy Libertarian-speak for "We want to control the levers of productive society." When you begin at the top of the slippery slope of communist ideals--as you have done--the rate of acceleration may startle you, but you should have known what was going to happen when you made that first tentative step.

    I agree with you ideologically damned near all of the time. But you are wrong for your continual boosterism of this idiocy.

  10. RaiulBaztepo:

    Very Interesting post! Thank you for such interesting resource!
    PS: Sorry for my bad english, I'v just started to learn this language ;)
    See you!
    Your, Raiul Baztepo

  11. PiterKokoniz:

    Hi !!!! ^_^
    I am Piter Kokoniz. Just want to tell, that I like your blog very much!
    And want to ask you: what was the reasson for you to start this blog?
    Sorry for my bad english:)
    Thank you:)
    Piter Kokoniz, from Latvia