Cap and Tax will rise again

Like green manna from heaven, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill may give Democrats yet new fodder to push cap-and-trade -- legislation setting a national limit to carbon emissions and giving the federal government the authority to parcel out "carbon credits."

Never mind that the climate has absolutely no connection to the spill, or even help mitigate future possibilities of disaster, but that's not the point - there'd be few things more shocking than if Team Obama didn't somehow exploit a "good crisis."

So what is the point? Well to understand, one must first understand progressives: while most people view disasters as, well disasters, what progressives see is power and giant tax dollar-signs. Formally titled the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, the bill would require a 3 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 (compared to 2005), a 17 percent reduction by 2020, and 83 percent by 2050, all in the name of combating the (nonexistent) "single biggest threat to our planet" and developing America's renewable energy infrastructure. But basically, it's just a giant new tax.

An analysis from the Heritage Foundation:

Americans can expect the following to occur between enactment and the year 2035 (all figures are adjusted for inflation):
  • Inflation-adjusted losses to gross domestic product (GDP) of $9.9 trillion;
  • More than $4.6 trillion in higher energy taxes;
  • Job losses exceeding 2.5 million for some years;
  • Annual family-of-four energy costs rising by $1,000, including a gasoline price increase of more than $1.20 per gallon;
  • Annual family-of-four energy costs plus increased cost of goods and services totaling more than $3,000;
  • Average GDP loss per family of four above $4,500 per year;
  • Family-of-four net worth dropping by more than $40,000; and
  • The family of four's share of the national debt rising by an additional $27,000.
Although many believed it to be dead, the Obama administration appears to be preparing one last push for energy legislation: "White House, green groups and industry will continue their closed-door negotiations until the moment the bill comes to the floor as early as Monday," reports the Wall Street Journal. "If all goes according to plan, ObamaCare and financial regulation may end up looking like models of thoughtful deliberation." Harry Reid has even found a new way to pitch the toxic plan, rebranding cap-and-trade lexicon as efforts against "heat-trapping pollution."

Equally bunk is the renewable energy argument Team Obama uses to rationalize cap-and-trade. As evidence clearly shows, Europe's green-jobs revolution has been a costly and unequivocal disaster. One study from Spain cites "massive unemployment, loss of capital, dismantlement of productive facilities and perpetuation of inefficient ones" as inherent attributes of the green "schemes." But perhaps the experience will spark a different kind of "revolution" in Europe - the enlightenment that no matter how hard liberals try (with other people's money of course), they can't defy the basic laws of economics. Derek Birkett, a leading energy expert in Britain, recently warned that his country's obsession with renewable energy has led to a crisis that "could match that of the recent banking collapse."

Fortunately for Americans, some experts argue the legislation will merely "lead to the same conditions that caused the housing bubble of a few years ago," while the Energy Information Administration estimates only a $452 billion-cut into the nation's GDP -a small price to pay to prevent genocide or to save the planet.


Follow Anthony Kang on Facebook and Twitter.


Like green manna from heaven, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill may give Democrats yet new fodder to push cap-and-trade -- legislation setting a national limit to carbon emissions and giving the federal government the authority to parcel out "carbon credits."

Never mind that the climate has absolutely no connection to the spill, or even help mitigate future possibilities of disaster, but that's not the point - there'd be few things more shocking than if Team Obama didn't somehow exploit a "good crisis."

So what is the point? Well to understand, one must first understand progressives: while most people view disasters as, well disasters, what progressives see is power and giant tax dollar-signs. Formally titled the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, the bill would require a 3 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 (compared to 2005), a 17 percent reduction by 2020, and 83 percent by 2050, all in the name of combating the (nonexistent) "single biggest threat to our planet" and developing America's renewable energy infrastructure. But basically, it's just a giant new tax.

An analysis from the Heritage Foundation:

Americans can expect the following to occur between enactment and the year 2035 (all figures are adjusted for inflation):
  • Inflation-adjusted losses to gross domestic product (GDP) of $9.9 trillion;
  • More than $4.6 trillion in higher energy taxes;
  • Job losses exceeding 2.5 million for some years;
  • Annual family-of-four energy costs rising by $1,000, including a gasoline price increase of more than $1.20 per gallon;
  • Annual family-of-four energy costs plus increased cost of goods and services totaling more than $3,000;
  • Average GDP loss per family of four above $4,500 per year;
  • Family-of-four net worth dropping by more than $40,000; and
  • The family of four's share of the national debt rising by an additional $27,000.
Although many believed it to be dead, the Obama administration appears to be preparing one last push for energy legislation: "White House, green groups and industry will continue their closed-door negotiations until the moment the bill comes to the floor as early as Monday," reports the Wall Street Journal. "If all goes according to plan, ObamaCare and financial regulation may end up looking like models of thoughtful deliberation." Harry Reid has even found a new way to pitch the toxic plan, rebranding cap-and-trade lexicon as efforts against "heat-trapping pollution."

Equally bunk is the renewable energy argument Team Obama uses to rationalize cap-and-trade. As evidence clearly shows, Europe's green-jobs revolution has been a costly and unequivocal disaster. One study from Spain cites "massive unemployment, loss of capital, dismantlement of productive facilities and perpetuation of inefficient ones" as inherent attributes of the green "schemes." But perhaps the experience will spark a different kind of "revolution" in Europe - the enlightenment that no matter how hard liberals try (with other people's money of course), they can't defy the basic laws of economics. Derek Birkett, a leading energy expert in Britain, recently warned that his country's obsession with renewable energy has led to a crisis that "could match that of the recent banking collapse."

Fortunately for Americans, some experts argue the legislation will merely "lead to the same conditions that caused the housing bubble of a few years ago," while the Energy Information Administration estimates only a $452 billion-cut into the nation's GDP -a small price to pay to prevent genocide or to save the planet.


Follow Anthony Kang on Facebook and Twitter.


RECENT VIDEOS