Fish Wrap Pushes Carbon Tax

I always find it amusing that Leftists, who are primarily the people pushing the climate change hoax, tend to always think that taxes are the solution. In this case, the NY Times pushes a carbon tax, rather than suggesting that all Warmists should practice what they preach. Warmists do not want to have their own lives affected. After a lot of fluff and silliness we get

According to the respected M.I.T. global climate simulation model, there is a 10 percent chance that average surface temperatures will rise by more than 12 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. Warming on that scale could end life as we know it. Smaller increases would be less catastrophic, but even the most optimistic projections imply enormous costs.

More prognostication from hysterics, despite the temperatures being statistically insignificant over the past 15 years even though CO2 levels have risen.

The good news is that we could insulate ourselves from catastrophic risk at relatively modest cost by enacting a steep carbon tax. Early studies by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimated that a carbon tax of up to $80 per metric ton of emissions — a tax that might raise gasoline prices by 70 cents a gallon — would eventually result in climate stability. But because recent estimates about global warming have become more pessimistic, stabilization may require a much higher tax. How hard would it be to live with a tax of, say, $300 a ton?

If such a tax were phased in, the prices of goods would rise gradually in proportion to the amount of carbon dioxide their production or use entailed. The price of gasoline, for example, would slowly rise by somewhat less than $3 a gallon. Motorists in many countries already pay that much more than Americans do, and they seem to have adapted by driving substantially more efficient vehicles.

A carbon tax would also serve two other goals. First, it would help balance future budgets. Tens of millions of Americans are set to retire in the next decades, and, as a result, many budget experts agree that federal budgets simply can’t be balanced with spending cuts alone. We’ll also need substantial additional revenue, most of which could be generated by a carbon tax.

A second benefit would occur if a carbon tax were approved today but phased in gradually, only after the economy had returned to full employment. High unemployment persists in part because businesses, sitting on mountains of cash, aren’t investing it because their current capacity already lets them produce more than people want to buy. News that a carbon tax was coming would create a stampede to develop energy-saving technologies. Hundreds of billions of dollars of private investment might be unleashed without adding a cent to the budget deficit.

So, raise taxes for a fictional issue which will accomplish nothing but causing prices across the board to rise, but “could” balance the budget and might help with “green” energy. Interestingly, the rest of the article also fails to mention how this would stop the temperature rise and “extreme” weather. Wouldn’t that be the point of a carbon tax? All the Times’ is doing is finding a way to directly move more money from the private sector to the public sector.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Fish Wrap Pushes Carbon Tax”

  1. Gumball_Brains says:

    HOLY SHITE!!!! I think we now know where that person named “silly john” works. He is obviously one of their writers. And, no one fact checks any more.

    According to the respected M.I.T. global climate simulation model,

    Ummm.. which one? Aren’t we told that we don’t rely on one single model, but thousands of them and the results are averaged?

    there is a 10 percent chance that average surface temperatures will rise by more than 12 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

    10% chance of something happening? OMG!!! EVERYONE RUN THROUGH THE STREETS IN MASSIVE PANIC AND RIOT!!!!!!1!!1ELEVENMARK OH, and that is a 10% chance of a 12F increase to occur in the next 88 years. And yet, over the last 100 years we’ve only increased around 2-4F. And, we’ve been near stagnant over the last 10-15 years. So, there is a 90% chance that we won’t rise 12 degrees.

    Warming on that scale could end life as we know it.

    OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG
    How on “earth” did life ever start when it was 100’s of degrees hotter, 100’s of pounds more pressure, thousands of ppm more CO2, more MEthane, more oxides, no oxygen?!!?!??! If life started, then how did it start when our environment was so much worse? Meh, screw the facts!!

    but even the most optimistic projections imply enormous costs.

    Nothing like being hopeful for destruction and mahem. And who said the lib-socialists were not a cheery bunch.

    And the answer to save us all is???:

    we could insulate ourselves from catastrophic risk at relatively modest cost by enacting a steep carbon tax.

    So, making people pay more in taxes will clean the air and lower temperatures? Interesting linkage there. Wonder what it will do to the orbit of the moons of Endor?

    How about we look at reality? How does CAlifornia or New England states look now that they’ve had their carbon taxes going on? anyone? anyone? Beuller? Carbon tax schemes are crashing due to the eroding market in these fake pyramid schemes. Temperatures there are still the same. CO2 levels have not decreased. People are still buying things like cars, plane tickets, and using electricity.

    A carbon tax would also serve two other goals. First, it would help balance future budgets.

    You know what else would? A 100% tax. That would also help pay off the budget. It won’t pay for all of it as our budget is 250% of all incomes.

    many budget experts agree that federal budgets simply can’t be balanced with spending cuts alone.

    So, in other words, screw it. WHy even try. Just stop cutting the budget and just raise taxes to pay for piss-art, shrimp treadmills, navy boobjobs, bridges to nowhere, etc. There is nothing that can be cut, so just enact another tax to make it look like something is being done about budget.

    Granted, having an ever increasing budget over 200% of incomes will never ever be paid off. But then, that is never the aim of Socialists. Their aim is to only increase taxation and control, to limit freedoms and stop the free flow of ideas, information, and energy.

    Sorry Teach, I disagree with you on your “benefit of increased taxation on carbon”. Increasing the cost of energy does nothing but harm those on the edge of financial security. The sole reason we became the economic superpower that we are is because of the easy, cheap, and reliable access to energy. Making that harder and more expensive will only further harm our economy. (or did you end your “quote” too soon?)

  2. Oops, that “a second benefit” is part of the article, and should be excerpted. Fixing.

  3. john says:

    now Gummy Brain just come down a bit. As Teach so often posts there is a new Ice Age just around the cornor. And all you christians know that it is God who controls the weather, not “science”. Oh Teach, care to post any news about the size of the arctic ice cover ? I think I heard that this was going to be an all time record low, but probably some will say that it is just a local weather condition and not caused by the whiole planet heating up. The GOP IS the anti science party of choice, they choose to believe things based on faith not observalable facts or reality.

  4. Gumball_Brains says:

    How is YOUR faith holding up against the fact that the Arctic still has “tons” more ice than when during the pre-1930s and during periods of non-glacialation.

    If we are in a period between full-world glacial cover and a period of complete loss of ice.. how does this then now compare?

    Thanks for reminding us that Realists are based on science and climate alarmists’ faith is built solely on hype and alarmism.

  5. Hey, John, care to quote a post or comment of mine where I’ve said an ice age is around the corner? I’ve asked many times, and you keep failing.

    Artic is down a bit, just what one would expect during the summer.

    Antarctica is up, just like one would expect.

Bad Behavior has blocked 9482 access attempts in the last 7 days.