If that’s what carbon taxes are, then they have also been shot down in much the same way, because virtually every carbon tax proposal in the U.S. has been shot down. Here you have Steven Rattner, who served as counselor to the Treasury secretary in the Obama administration (which had such awesome economic policies, eh?) making the argument to tax the ever loving hell out of the middle and lower classes, because Warmists never give up on a good taxation scheme
Carbon Taxes Are the Original Green New Deal
Yes, of course, we need a Green New Deal to address the world’s most urgent crisis, global warming.
Just, please, not the one that a flotilla of liberal politicians, including seven of the top Democratic presidential hopefuls currently in the Senate, are signing up for in droves, like children following the pied piper in the old legend.
Our modern-day pied piper, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is trying to lure us into a set of policies that might help save the planet but at the cost of severely damaging the global economy.
To be sure, by the time the resolution was introduced into Congress, some of its most ludicrous provisions (like the deadline of 2030 for a full transition to renewable energy and the immediate halt to any investment in fossil fuels) had been eliminated or watered down.
But as important as continuing to prune the absurd or damaging provisions would be to add what is the most effective way to attack climate change: using taxes and market forces rather than government controls to reduce harmful emissions.
Interesting. First he portrays AOC as the moron she is (Dems are really getting sick of her), and second attempts to portray government implemented and run taxes as not governmental control. Kinda like how the Idiot Republican members of the Cult of Climastrology call these same taxes “free market.”
Fortunately, there is a better way to address the climate problem at far lower cost to the economy: a tax on greenhouse gas emissions. That can be imposed in any number of ways. The 18.4 cent federal gasoline tax, for example, hasn’t been increased since 1993 even as most other developed countries impose far higher levies.
A particularly thoughtful proposal has come from the Climate Leadership Council, a bipartisan organization that counts more than 3,300 economists among its signatories. Elegant in its simplicity, the key provision would be the imposition of an escalating tax on carbon. At an initial rate of $43 per ton, the levy would be roughly equivalent to 38.2 cents per gallon of gasoline.
Who gets hurt by this? The middle and lower classes, of course, so
The entire proceeds from the tax would be rebated to consumers. The council suggests an equal amount for each American; my view would be to exclude the wealthy (who hardly need the estimated $2,000 a year in payments) and disproportionately favor those closer to the bottom.
First, the full cost of living never gets rebated. Second, this type of carbon tax scheme was invented several years ago to attempt to not only make it look palatable to voters, but to further make them dependent on government. If government is acting like your parents giving you an allowance, even if they are the ones that caused the spike in your cost of living, you are now dependent on getting that money.
Remember this?
But the AP survey also showed that Americans don’t want to pay very much to fight climate change. A $1 per month fee was favored by 57 percent of those surveyed. However, if the monthly charge increased to $10 a month, just 28 percent would be supportive, while 68 percent would be opposed.
That was January. Does anyone think people are going to want to see their costs go up $166 a month, based on the $2,000 rebate number from Rattner above? Because the real number will surely be more. You could easily be paying $5 a gallon for gas. With my Accord (yes, I now have an Accord Sport, got rid of the Jeep Liberty) it would mean about $100 a month instead of $50. Cost of vehicles will go up, which means auto insurance will go up. Cost of goods will go up as the transportation costs go up. Cost of homes will go up. Cost of energy for your domicile will go up. Want to take a vacation or visit the parents? Increased airfare, increased hotel rates, increased food rates. Food at restaurants will go up. Clothes will go up. Shipping rates for your Internet orders will go up. Altogether, think it will be more than $166 a month? Even if it is just, say, $100, are you up for that? Remember, that is just the starting figure as the cost of carbon is artificially raised by government.
Read: NY Times: Carbon Taxes Are The Original Green New Deal Or Something »
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced Thursday that the government will ban “military-style semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles,” in an attempt to head-off “the kind of horror and attack that we saw on Friday.” She said the outlawed weapons will be listed on a website and are the type that were used in the attack on two mosques in Christchurch last week.
Liccardo has maintained his position for the past four years that the county should reconsider its stance on sanctuary policies after the murder of Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco stating that “elected officials should be able to distinguish between a violent, predatory felon and more than the 99 percent of members of our immigrant communities who would never commit such crimes.â€
A judge has blocked oil and gas drilling on almost 500 square miles in Wyoming and says the government must consider the cumulative climate change impact of leasing broad swaths of U.S. public lands for oil and gas exploration.
President Trump said Wednesday for the first time that he would be okay with making the Mueller report public. And in doing so, he nixed a major argument against its release.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday handed the Trump administration a victory in its battle to clamp down on 
