- ‹ previous
- 853 of 2794
- next ›
Chart of the Day
Republicans have been screaming blue murder for months about the cost of the cap-and-trade provision of the Waxman-Markey climate change bill. It's going to cost us $1,600 each! No, that's wrong: it's going to cost us $3,100 each! Head for the hills!
So Rep. Dave Camp, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means committee, asked the Congressional Budget Office for a verdict. And guess what? The net cost turned out to be — at most — $175 per household by the year 2020. That's less than $70 per person:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the net annual economywide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion — or about $175 per household. That figure [...] does not include the economic benefits and other benefits of the reduction in GHG emissions and the associated slowing of climate change....Overall net costs would average 0.2 percent of households’ after-tax income.
Low income households would fare even better. The CBO's table of net costs is below.
Yes, but the numbers in the
Yes, but the numbers in the "gross costs" column are the ones that Joe Barton and friends are going to inundate the airwaves with. Just you watch. *hopes I'm wrong*
Even these are overestimates.
Over at climate progress a bit more analysis. The probable bottom line, increased conservation/efficiency could easily make up the estimated $22B net estimated cost. Then increased innovation sparked by attempts to control carbon...
But, we've seen the sort of disinformation that we are going to keep getting. Massive estimates of costs -claims we will be causing poor people to starve to death etc.
Easier on the highest quintile than the fourth
I'm glad you included this chart, because it's very helpful in rebutting opponents' claims that cap-and-trade will be an impossible burden on American households.
At the same time, however, it's important to note one of the bizarre features of Waxman-Markey's distributional impact: the net cost in the highest quintile is actually lower than the cost in the fourth quintile. This is entirely due to the fact that free permit allocations represent windfall profits for shareholders, most of whom are quite affluent. The more people understand the obscene distributional effects of free allocation, the less politically tenable they'll be, and studies like this one provide some great numbers to cite as evidence.
Yeah, Cap and Trade
It doesn't cost anything because it doesn't do anything. If it did more, it would cost more. Typical MO: Propose something which does nothing: debate strenuously so the rubes think it's important; pass it with great reluctance and drama. Repeat for Health Care. Progress.
Margrave has it exactly
Margrave has it exactly correct. Pick any number from any of those columns you like. Poor people aren't going to change much about their behavior for $425. The rich certainly won't change anything for $1,380.
At these prices, what exactly is the mechanism that couples the Rube Goldberg contraption being constructed to CO2 reduction? I don't care whether that reduction is increased efficiency, banned cars, better power plants whatever --- exactly what SIGNIFICANT behavior that isn't occurring now is going to occur at these prices?
Last time I checked, the goal here was to REDUCE CO2 emissions, it was not to pass cap-and-trade.
At this point, the cost
At this point, the cost isn't the thing that makes the bill unworkable. It's the fact that half of greenhouse gases are exempted from the limits(livestock and purely consumer emissions), while the other half is given away for free, mainly to coal companies and the auto companies.
So what we're basically left with is a tax on oil companies. The special interests already won this battle. Better to not pass anything at this point.
You guys whole shtick was that yes, a carbon tax might be better, but it was politically impossible. Now that you've proven that cap and trade is equally impossible given all the exemptions and special benefits stuck into the bill, it might be time to drop cap and trade and fight for a revenue-neutral carbon tax.
Top quintile makes out as usual
As usual, top quintile does better than fourth quintile! It's magic!