Comments on: Feeling Chilly About Cap And Trade

By: Laer

Laer — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 05:26:42 +0000

Yes – sorry for the error – I can’t trust the top of my head when it comes to numbers; I’ve got poor number memory. The last glacial maximum was about 21,000 years ago and oceans started rising as the glaciers began melting, picking up steam 14,000 years ago.

By: James Williams

James Williams — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:44:53 +0000

Sea levels have been rising for the last 10,000 to 12,000 years or so, not 100,000 years. The sea level has risen over 400 feet in that time.

By: Roy Lofquist

Roy Lofquist — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 14:14:53 +0000

Obamarx definitely. Karl, Groucho or both?

By: Laer

Laer — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:33:59 +0000

Yessiree. However it does it, fees on transactions or taxes on transactions, $2 trillion comes out to about $8,000 a year in new costs – taxes – for every man, woman and child in the U.S. And that’s assuming the taxed carbon emitters pass on the fee/tax without mark-up.

By: J. Ewing

J. Ewing — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 03:03:10 +0000

Let’s think about this a bit. The whole premise of this “cap and trade” idea is that we have a “free market” in CO2 emissions (something which actually has no value in the free market, but…). Supposedly somebody with a nice, new, green power plant would sell the CO2 they’re not emitting to somebody still running one of the 90% of power plants that emit CO2. OK, pricey, but a fair exchange, and a “driver” to get people to build the more “green” power plants (unless it’s nuclear, then all bets are off).
OK, so how is it that this free market exchange between private entitiies, on the side, generates $2 trillion in revenue for the government?