Posted on 06/28/2009 8:27:47 PM PDT by newbie2008
So the House of Represenatives has passed the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, and the issue now heads to the Senate. In his weekly address on Saturday, Pres. Obama urged the Senate to pass the measure. What were his reasons? Basically those that are irrelevant from a sound public policy perspective: green jobs and reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
First, I've never really bought into the "dependence on foreign oil" issue. I think it's mostly rooted in politicians appealing to what Caplan would call an anti-foreign bias among the American public. With regards to the green jobs, it's nonsense to consider these jobs as a benefit of cap-and-trade. Not only do most of the green jobs just come at the expense of jobs in the "dirty" job sector, this whole talk of "jobs" is a red herring.
Using Obama's argument, if government heavily taxed coffee, we could not only reduce our dependence on foreign coffee beans, we would create more jobs in industries whose products were substitutes for coffee (say milk or orange juice). Imagine all the new dairy farmers there would be or citrus growers out there working to meet the increased demand for milk and orange juice.
Of course he would. It is a codeword for redistribution and more tax.
Cap and trade has nothing to do with something that is a FRAUD and SCAM, Why do all thse cowards on the Right just fold like cheap cameras,cite all the Studies that show Carbon dioxide does not lead Temperature rise it is just the Opposite,so it does not cause Warming!
Such twisted logic is already at work. We tax cigarettes to discourage smoking yet use the revenue to fund children's health care. So to expand children's health care will we not need more people to smoke?
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.