Betraying the Planet

[KrazyHorse]

1.) Whose patrons are going to be effected more by this. Given the demographics of the people affected, the Dems suffer a double punch because the industries specifically targeted employ a huge swath of their supporters and also encompass large organizational allies, and also because the general price increases will disproportionately affect their entire voter base.

I requested something which actually makes sense.

Do you have any sort of figures to back up your assertion that "the industries specifically targeted" (list them, and explain how you know they were targeted) employ "a huge swath" of Democrats (more clearly, that they employ significantly more Dems than Reps)?

Secondly, as has already been explained, distributional effects can be countered with lump-sum disbursements.

2.) What the actual point of the legislation is. It is supposed to make the carbon intensive options more expensive, forcing a change in behavior. If you mitigate that greater expense, you are also diluting the behavior changing purpose of the legislation. That dilution may just reduce the incentive to change to that of the rest of the (higher income) population, but it will still reduce the incentive program wide.

This paragraph demonstrates a fundamental lack of reasoning skills. A lump sum disbursement which mitigates the distributional aspect of a pigovian tax does nothing to dilute the incentives inherent in the tax.

The point of the tax is to change the RELATIVE PRICE of carbon intensive goods and non-carbon intensive goods. Thus, even at exactly the same real income, people will make different consumption choices.

[Patroklos]

Do you have any sort of figures to back up your assertion that "the industries specifically targeted" (list them, and explain how you know they were targeted) employ "a huge swath" of Democrats (more clearly, that they employ significantly more Dems than Reps)?

KH, where are the manufacturing centers of the country located at? Who works there and what party sucks up that demographic. You can try and be cute and coy, but you know damn well that manufacturing and energy concerns are going to be the prime targets of the legislation, a good portion of both (manufacturing more than energy) are focused in blue sates and their employees are in the Democratic demographic.

Secondly, as has already been explained, distributional effects can be countered with lump-sum disbursements.

Assuming this happens, and assuming this can be appropriately targeted.

This paragraph demonstrates a fundamental lack of reasoning skills. A lump sum disbursement which mitigates the distributional aspect of a pigovian tax does nothing to dilute the incentives inherent in the tax.

The point of the tax is to change the RELATIVE PRICE of carbon intensive goods and non-carbon intensive goods. Thus, even at exactly the same real income, people will make different consumption choices.

I see what you are saying (it still dilutes the incentive for the poor, if by only making the incentive even), but you are also assuming that vendors will not simply raise their prices for all products, as opposed to targeting their price rises.

[Ramo]

I see what you are saying (it still dilutes the incentive for the poor, if by only making the incentive even), but you are also assuming that vendors will not simply raise their prices for all products, as opposed to targeting their price rises.

This is complete gibberish.

[KrazyHorse]

KH, where are the manufacturing centers of the country located at? Who works there and what party sucks up that demographic. You can try and be cute and coy, but you know damn well that manufacturing and energy concerns are going to be the prime targets of the legislation, a good portion of both (manufacturing more than energy) are focused in blue sates and their employees are in the Democratic demographic.

I actually have a problem with these assertions. I'm asking you to provide some sort of evidence for the location of the affected industries. I'm ALSO asking you to explain what you mean by "targeted".

Assuming this happens, and assuming this can be appropriately targeted.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. By definition, a lump sum disbursement is NOT targeted. And as I understand it, this is basically what is in Waxman-Markey

it still dilutes the incentive for the poor

No. No, no, no. The incentive is the RELATIVE PRICE. Not some sort of deliberate effort to lower real incomes so that people pollute less.

but you are also assuming that vendors will not simply raise their prices for all products, as opposed to targeting their price rises

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Producers will raise their prices to account for the cost of carbon permits. Do you even have any idea how prices get set? It's not by some sort of monolithic entity who can choose to put prices at whatever level it wants. There are many producers and many consumers. If a producer attempts to raise the prices of goods out of proportion to the cost of the carbon permits involved in their production and use then other producers will get their business as customers switch. Nobody actually needs to do this calculation. THIS is the beauty of the market.

[KrazyHorse]

The problem with Waxman Markey (I'm still uncertain as to the spelling of that second name) is that the bill is too complicated and does deliberately target some specific things. Not that it fails to properly target.

When a piece of legislation like this attempts to find specific solutions (as in subsidizing development of technology) then it limits the ability of the market to perform the efficiency calculation.

Additionally, the bill gives handouts to current polluters. The reason this is a real problem has to do with tradeoffs. Dollars handed out to companies cannot be used for any of the following purposes:

a) Reducing distortionary taxes (capital gains, payroll, income)
b) Redistribution
c) Some unspecified government program you think should receive funding

Pigovian taxes are THE example of a win-win situation. The government can help the market achieve a more efficient solution by forcing individuals to include external costs in their calculations. Additionally, they raise revenue (which it therefore doesn't have to do by other methods which REDUCE the efficiency of outcomes produced by the market).

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Poly has spoken and is not happy:

Virgin-Americans Vow Fight Against Cap-and-Trade's Blood Sacrifice Amendment

WASHINGTON - The President's landmark 'Cap and Trade' bill faces an uncertain fate this week, as congressional backers of the carbon-limiting legislation face mounting opposition from a myriad of interest groups angered by its controversial ritual virgin sacrifice provision.

"We are asking our members to send a strong message to Washington that this bill is wrong for America's energy future, and wrong for the virgin community," said Bret 'Aslan' Crawford, a spokesman for the Action Figure Collectors of America. "Power virgins, activate!"

The 87,492 page bill -- official designated as the American Patriotic Renewal Act of 2009 for Carbon Reduction, Energy Independence, Heathy Climate, Sustainable Job Growth, Adorable Puppies, and Earthly Paradise -- is a keystone in President Obama's first year legislative agenda, and was originally anticipated to get swift congressional passage. Instead, it faced a unexpectedly tough vote in the House last week after coal state Democrats complained it would place an unfair economic burden on their home districts.

"I am as interested in reversing global climate change as anyone, but I fail to see how increasing taxes and random machete attacks on Ohio coal producers alone will solve the problem," said Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). "Come on people, there are plenty of other industries who deserve machete attacks too."

In order to secure the votes of wavering Democrats, House leaders Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman inserted several last minute amendments to the legislation, including provisions for national oxygen rationing, witch burnings, dousings, and phrenology research. But the one that has seemingly stoked a grassroots backlash is the controversial Sexually Inexperienced Citizen Environmental Volunteer Amendment. The wording of the amendment calls for all American virgins over the age of 21 to register with the Selective Sacrifice Board, for possible use as victims in nationally televised vivisections intended to "supplicate the Earth-Spirits."

Reaction, in some quarters, was swift and harsh. Robert 'Shadowfyre' Jardocki of the Wizard and Warlocks Guild called it "an affront to all Virtual America, from Second Life to World of Warcraft," and vowed his group would cast the "most powerful lobbying spell the country has ever seen." Denise 'Lady Gwynnethynn' Kelly of the American Society of Renaissance Faire Royalty decried it as "a unconstitutional attack on our members and their ladies in-waiting." The National Association of Space Fantasists made an impassioned "call to light sabers," while the Brotherhood of Sports Bar Regulars vowed a "million replica jersey march" on Washington to stop its passage. Other groups uniting to oppose the bill include MENSA, the Society for the Identification of Motion Picture Continuity Problems, and the American Association of Anonymous Comment Thread Trolls.

"Congress and the Administration really stirred up a hornet's nest of virgins with this bill," said longtime Washington-watcher Michael Barone. "The response really caught them flat-footed. I don't think they realized just how adept the virgin community is at computers, and how much time they have between ComiCons or SpaceCons or whatever-cons. Instead of calling into sports radio shows, now they're calling the capitol switchboard."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended the bill, saying that "it is critical that we do something immediately to show we are serious about solving this climate crisis. Without burnt offerings of taxes and virgins, Gaia will smite us all in her angry burning wrath. So let me just say to the corporate and virgin special interest groups -- don't come crying to us in 400 years, when our temperatures are up almost 1 degree celsius."

Pelosi denied the bill was anti-consumer, pointing out it contains specific infrastructure and job creation funds. It specifies 500,000 unionized positions to construct a planned 300-foot tall National Eco Pyramid and Virgin Sacrifice Altar in Youngstown, Ohio, as well as funds to train over 20,000 youth volunteer earth-priests in live beating heart removal.

House Energy Committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-CA) defended the bill's controversial 'virgin exclusions' rider, which specifies sacrificial exemptions for certain religious orders, members of Congress, and Keith Olbermann.

"The rider simply recognizes that virgin members of Congress are often so busy doing the work of the people that we have little opportunity for actual sexual intercourse," said Waxman. "For example, were I not focusing on this crucial legislation, I would totally be porking some sexy, sexy ladies. No, really, I'm serious. I would be. Stop laughing."

Bill co-sponsor Edward Markey (D-MA) said that even if enacted into law, the bill allows a 9 month grace period for current virgins to change their sacrifice eligibility status.

"Easy for him to say," complained Kevin Warren, a 34-year old Green Bay Packer fanatic from Fon du Lac, Wisconsin. "You try getting laid with a foam rubber cheese hat, green face paint and Favre jersey."

Whether Warren and other Virgin-Americans have the clout to scuttle the bill remains to be seen. It is scheduled for Senate deliberations as soon as the House Sergeant-at-Arms can locate a crane powerful enough to move the entire document to the Senate chamber. If passed there, it is expected to be quickly signed into law by President Obama.

Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs, himself a well-known virgin, sought to allay fears about the bill.

"Look, I know this bill has been the subject of wild rumors and speculation, but let's all just sit back and see how it plays out," said Gibbs. "The bottom line is that the virgin community has nothing to worry about. Believe me, if this thing passes, I promise everybody's going to get screwed."

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The problem with Waxman Markey (I'm still uncertain as to the spelling of that second name) is that the bill is too complicated and does deliberately target some specific things. Not that it fails to properly target.

You mean like the whole electricity generation hoo-ha. If the supposed intent of this bill is a sell to those who don't necessarily buy into the whole AGW thing, but moreover a sop intended to wean USA off of foreign oil dependence then electricity generation would be one of the last places to target.

[KrazyHorse]

The renewable energy target is indeed one of the stupid things in the bill.

If it's cheaper to reduce output from other sources then why should we force electricity companies to reduce their output?

This type of regulation reduces the flexibility of the market system to price in the internalization of carbon output most efficiently.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ogie:

Virgin sacrifice eh?

It's like that old joke about tigers. I don't have to outrun the tiger, I just have to outrun you.

[BlackCat]

Having US corporations pay the environment tax and outside corporations not isn't very fair is it?

We should set up a tax or tariff based on what the country fails to tax their own companies with and tell them that it will be removed if they start to tax their companies properly.

By tax I still am meaning fines/taxes/regulation.

JM

Just out of curiosity - what would the US reaction be if say EU put taxes on US products until they met EU measures ?

EDIT: Must US companies would probably go bankrupcy if they had to comply to EU rules.

[Whoha]

Hopefully the senate will kill this stinker.

[notyoueither]

Relax, Whoha. Get a hooker.

[Sava]

A more apt metaphor would have been treason against humanity. The planet will keep on spinning long after we're all dead. And I hate it when people say "save the environment", as if the environment is supposed to be Mother Nature... an idea to be worshiped like God, Jesus, Barack Obama, or Hitler.

Pumping noxious gases in the air hurts us, not the planet. It's possible that we've passed the point of no return. With the amount of deforestation, animal extinction, and toxic chemical pollution in our oceans, our species will likely perish. From our POV, this will take a while. On a geologic time scale, it will happen in the blink of an eye. This era of "advanced technology", the monuments to our narcissism, our pride in how superior we as the supreme life form on this planet... it won't mean ****. Enjoy what you have now. Maybe in several dozens of millions of years, the next dominant species will dig up something that remains of us and wonder what happened... right before their arrogance and stupidity leads them into extinction.

[Lancer]

The Earth will recover but humanity may not. Consider that the planet recovered from the Snowball Earth where greenhouse gasses may have been 250 times what they are today. I do not fear for the Earth.