Skip to comments.Why carbon tax will work even if climate change theory is wrong
Posted on 11/25/2010 7:57:32 AM PST by NRG1973
Just because nobody knows the future is no excuse to do nothing in the face of worrisome possibilities, says Dan Gardner, the author of a solidly researched new book that makes it clear just how shaky if not dead wrong expert predictions usually are.
Good policy, Gardner writes in Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail and Why We Believe Them Anyway, stands up as worthwhile even if the forecast that prompted it turns out to be wrong.
He cites as an example a stiff carbon tax with the revenues returned to the economy in the form of cuts to other taxes which is what we have in B.C., except our carbon tax isnt so stiff.
Would it deliver even if climate change turns out to be bunk? he asks.
Absolutely. Carbon taxes raise the effective cost of fossil fuels, making alternative energy more competitive and spurring research and development. And reducing the use of fossil fuels while increasing the diversity of our energy sources would be wonderful for a whole host of reasons aside from climate change. It would reduce local air pollution, reduce the risk of catastrophic oil spills, buffer economies against the massive shocks inflicted by oil price spikes, and lessen the worlds vulnerability to instability in the Middle East and elsewhere. It would also reduce the torrent of cash flowing from the developed world to the thuggish governments that control most oil-producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Russia. And of course theres peak oil. If the peaksters turn out to be right, finally, how much of our economy is fuelled by oil will determine how badly we will suffer so carbon taxes would steadily reduce that threat, too.
(Excerpt) Read more at communities.canada.com ...
Good idea. Let’s replace income taxes with consumption taxes.
We could call it the FairTax.
Its amazing that it took a liberal Canadian to think of that. </sarc>
What a mindset we are saddled with.
“Revenues Returned To The Economy In The Form Of Cuts To Other Taxes”?In a PIG’S EYE!!
It’s scary to think that this guy is walking around loose among us. He definitely has some serious “issues”.
Oh good after the carbon tax collapses the Canadian economy I will get to add socialist give-me-free-stuff Canadian illegal economic immigrants to the current give-me-free-stuff Latin American immigrants.
Simply brilliant! The fevered liberal mind at work.
Every layer of taxation requires a huge new government bureaucracy that will scrape off its take, further diminishing the productive power of society. That's a real recipe for success.
You know what's scarier...he isn't the only one that feels this way.
“Lets have another tax for the sake of having another tax”
WE are the "elsewhere". We have oil running our of our ears. Offshore (near and far), in Alaska, in shale. HUGE amounts of oil. Potential MASSIVE deposits offshore to be exploited as Brazil does. Natural gas too. If only we STOPPED government meddling on behalf of environmental "experts".
Another tax will cure all of our ills. Where have we heard that before?
If we found an acceptable and viable alternative energy source, it would pay for itself without being financed with tax dollars. Wind, solar and ethanol don’t stand on their own and all-electric cars will never compete with the gold standard we’ve been so accustomed to.
Why the hell does the envirowhacko left always push us regressively instead of forward technologically?
yeah if someone wants to make the case that there is a problem with importing oil from the middle east then why would he want to tax his own energy sources?
The argument fails on purely economic terms. His arguments are too idiotic to refute in detail and not worth the time. Spare us.
In brief, he is assuming that there is a market failure than can be remedied by targeted taxes and subsidies. If one of his assumptions is invalidated, the whole house of cards collapses. Since the previous pretext (assumption) for targeted taxes is now widely greeted with skeptism if not outright derision, he shifts premises and hopes nobody notices.
Lookit, we’re not that stoopid and we noticed, now cut it out. Capish?
According to Bjorn Lomborg, even if the Kyoto Protocol had been fully adopted and implemented, it would only decrease global temperature by 0.008 degree Fahrenheit by the year 2100. Similarly, current European Union climate policy will cost $250 billion of GDP annually, yet it will likely decrease global temperature by a mere 0.1 degree Fahrenheit.
So who is actually going to benefit from these carbon taxes?
Great idea. Let’s tax all government salaries 70% and return the money to the taxpayers.
This dude must have been hanging around smoking crack in East Hastings for too long.
But, but it is working out so well in China (not):
The Unintended Consequences of Carbon Reduction in China
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.