We Totally Need Market Based Solutions To Solve “Climate Change”

I love when hardcore Progressives start yammering about market economics, because it’s easy to see that they often do not understand free markets, and are interested in free markets. Here’s Kyle E. Thomas at Syracuse.com, who is the group leader for the Syracuse chapter of the (astroturfed) Citizens’ Climate Lobby

This Earth Day, let’s take on climate change, and improve our economy (Commentary)

Since its beginning in 1970, Earth Day has become an internationally celebrated, yearly recognition of the Earth and the need for protection of our environment. In the intervening decades, however, despite our good intentions and individual actions, our environment has continued to suffer degradation, with climate change representing the most intractable and overarching of our challenges. And as evidenced by Secretary Paulson’s “Risky Business Project” report, the business community is beginning to quantify the possible financial risks associated with climate change, and they are enormous.

In reality, our environment is doing much, much better. The air is much cleaner, as is the land and waters.

The good news is that a solution exists that corrects the market failure that climate change represents, by being firmly grounded in the principles of market economics. That solution is a revenue-neutral carbon tax, endorsed by such prominent conservatives as former Secretary of State George Schultz, former U.S. Representative Bob Englis, and President George W. Bush’s former economic adviser Greg Mankiw as well as very recently by the Niskanen Center a Libertarian think tank.

What are those “market economics”?

Carbon Fee and Dividend” is such a revenue-neutral proposal advocated by the Citizens’ Climate Lobby, an international volunteer-based organization. The proposal consists of a gradually rising fee beginning at $15 per ton fee on CO2 equivalent fuel sources, and increasing by $10 per ton annually until specific, identified emissions goals are achieved. As a frame of reference, $15 per ton CO2 equivalents translates roughly to an increase of 15 cents per gallon of gasoline, a variability we often see monthly at the filling station. Border adjustment tariffs are placed on imports from nations that do not have an equivalent measure in place to provide a level playing field for American businesses.

In an actual free market, the price of carbon offsets and such have collapsed in virtually every case, achieving junk bond status. What Warmists are pushing in no way resembles free market principles. Instead, this would be government setting the price and continuously raising the cost. Which would, of course, artificially raise the cost of virtually everything, meaning citizens would pay more thanks to Warmists, who refuse to currently practice what they preach.

Expressed numerically and assuming implementation beginning in 2015, REMI forecasts that by 2024 U.S. GDP will increase $840 billion over the baseline and $150 billion regionally. Jobs are projected to increase over the same period by approximately 2 million for the U.S. and by 250,000 for the Mid-Atlantic region.

In the real world, these jobs have been stagnant, despite dumping tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars, into “climate change” initiatives, including “green energy”. Seemingly, most of the jobs are simply about spreading awareness and raising money for “environmental” groups, which accomplish little. It’s been shown time and time again, with real world data, that for every 1 “green” job created, at least 2 jobs are lost.

This is just more proof that Warmists, part of the overall Progressive movement, want Government control of economies.

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

9 Responses to “We Totally Need Market Based Solutions To Solve “Climate Change””

  1. john says:

    Seemingly ?
    Maybe if you are living in a bubble of willful ignorance
    willful
    If you drove across the country you would see new wind farms every where.
    windpower has more jobs than coal
    Teach you were wrong when you predicted that Obama’s economic policies would kill jobs
    We have made morfe new jobs under him than since Clinton

  2. john says:

    And reduced Federal workers to their lowest numbers since the 60s even as our population has gone up by 50%

  3. david7134 says:

    john,
    No, you are wrong yet again. Obama is killing the economy and any jobs created are in flipping burgers. Simply because you see wind mills does not mean that jobs are great. Then again, didn’t someone write a book about tilting windmills?

  4. gitarcarver says:

    And reduced Federal workers to their lowest numbers since the 60s even as our population has gone up by 50%

    john (who still can’t find Selma) has problems with facts.

    According to the Office of Personnel Management, there are more Federal employees now than when Obama took office. The levels of Federal employees have not been higher since 1996.

    In addition, it should be remembered that the Feds started mandating more services upon the states which shifted the employment from the Feds to the states. Finally, it should also be remembered that under the failure known as the stimulus, levels of government workers rose and then when the funds ran out, those employees left their jobs. The interesting thing is that it appears those jobs did not impact the economy or the services provided by governments.

    The bottom line is that more people are out of the workforce as a percentage than the Great Depression.

    That’s the economy john is proud of as the money continues to be taken from people’s pockets.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Teach

    It’s you who understand little about markets. Carbon prices have not included the real costs of what actual economists refer to as the negative externalities of burning fossil fuels. Corporations, goverments and NGOs are starting to evaluate and even quantify the associated costs – perhaps the far-right can at least admit they exist.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Gitar boy just lied to everyone. Follow his own link to the data. Fewer federal workers in 2014 than in 2009. The federal workforce has not grown under Obama. The peak was under Bush I, and has dropped steadily since 1990.

    Next lie please. And please, one lie at a time.

  7. Dana says:

    We have a market based solution to our environmental issues. People started buying CFL bulbs not because they were mandated, but because they used less energy. (The supposed longer life didn’t seem to pan out, did it?) And now, people are moving to LED bulbs, because they work better than CFLs and aren’t toxic waste when it comes to disposal. (Supposedly, they’ll last a long time, but time will tell on that.)

    When there are practical solutions to save energy and money, consumers gradually move toward those options. When common sense is applied, people save more and make less waste. It’s only when you get the eco-fascists and the left trying to tell people what to do that resistance is encountered.

  8. gitarcarver says:

    Jeffrey once again demonstrated that he and john have reading comprehension problems.

    The chart provided by the OPM (which is a federal department) shows that in 2008 there were 2,692 thousand Federal employees. In 2009, at the end of first year of the Obama administration, there were 2,774 thousand Federal employees. In 2013, there were 2,698 federal employees.

    For 2014 the number has dropped to 2,663 thousand, which means for the first time in Obama’s presidency the Federal work force is smaller than when he took office.

    As stated, there were many reasons for the drop including the funds from the massive failure of the stimulus running out and the mandated shift of federal jobs to the states.

    In the world of liberals, 2774 thousand is less than 2693 thousand which tells you all you need to know about jeffery’s knowledge and understanding of basic math and science.

  9. Dana says:

    If there are slightly fewer federal workers in 2014, how much of that is due to the horrible, devastating, draconian sequester that President Obama opposed?

Bad Behavior has blocked 12018 access attempts in the last 7 days.