http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/26/house.energy/index.html So are the liberals happy? This is no doubt a form of taxation. Obama promised he would not raise taxes. Everyone who pays a power bill will now be paying more money. Unfortunately, this will hurt the lower class more than anyone. The bright side is that this will end many terms for those who are coming up in 2010. I only hope we can overturn much of this poor legislation.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, this taxation will be in the amount of $175 a year, by 2020. Most of the caps and permits will be free to start with costs being phased in. The whole thing sounds incredibly reasonable. If that projection holds up and costs on consumers aren't overbearing, what is the downside to this? Link from NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/us/politics/27climate.html?_r=1&hp
If this passes the Senate, I am investing in the next great bubble. Green stocks! Our economy is going to be booming until the green bubble busts.
I don't think the demand for an industry that promotes the sustainable use of our planet's resources is going to wane in any of our lifetimes.
save money? government's at its finest when it breaks your leg, gives you a crutch, then says, "see, you couldn't have walked without us."
That $175 estimate does not consider any effects on employement or on GDP. MIT's projection of the cost to a family is closer to $3,000. Obama is a complete idiot for trying to raise taxes at this time of economic uncertainty. Thankfully the Senate won't be as stupid as the House on this matter.
The 175 is a number they believe people will feel comfortable with. Socialist programs never cost what they "originally" intend to. Future administrations will always be toying with it, using it as another alternative to raise taxes.
Please refrain from using the term "socialist" until you gain a better understanding of what it means. This is not socialism.
Yes I know. I was referring to medicare, medicade, SS, healthcare, ect... What i was specifically saying is that in 10 or 20 years, they will keep increasing these taxes because "co2 levels" will continue to rise.
So basically you don't understand the topic of the thread you started and are deliberately muddying the issue by bringing up irrelevant topics that you likewise don't comprehend to bolster your paper-thin pre-fab notions. Thanks!
The socialists who are implementing a market-based solution to address the cost of externalities, I guess.
Source please. I sure hope a fine Rice grad such as yourself didn't misread a 2007 MIT report that could not have analyzed the current legislation unless the MIT folks also came up with the Flux Capacitor... because I think Rice grads are smarter than the average Republican pol using discredited talking points. Also, should you cite another source for your number, please tell us if it includes benefits realized from conservation, efficiency, green economy advancements, and the curbing of greenhouse gases.
Congress is actually doing something to slow down the damage we are doing to the environment? WHY YES, I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD BE AGAINST IT. I think we all should start our coal burning stoves and spray cfc's into the air for protest.... like those tea parties after Obama was elected. Seriously, how the hell can someone be against this?
higher taxes on people who make less than 250K increased price for goods and services long term of moving more energy intensive manufacturing jobs to other countries.
