Blue States (Dems) To Pay Less In Carbon Tax Than Red States (Republican)

Now the truth comes out about why Obama and the Dems are so hot to pass this idiotic cap-and-trade carbon tax proposal. It has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with political payoffs.

From Leland Conway of the Conservative Edge:

The Waxman/Markey Cap and Trade bill makes states like Kentucky, that produce energy through their rich coal resources, into the indentured servants of states like California and New York, who import that energy for their use. Here’s how it works. The bill, as it is currently structured, would impose massive fines on states that produce and export so called “dirty energy”. There would be a huge additional cost to the consumers in those states in order to carry this burden. Most conservative estimates put the additional cost to the average consumer in the Commonwealth at around $1700 per household per year. Meanwhile, states like California and New York actually pollute much more heavily than Kentucky does. They have a higher population, many more industries and many more cars on the highway. They import their energy however, so they will not be subject to the same fine structure that Kentucky and other coal producing states will be. In effect, that means we’ll be paying for the lifestyle and energy consumption of states that pollute much worse than we do.

If this were truly about the environment, states like California and New York would be more than willing to step up to the plate and pay their fair share, or even more than their fair share if their belief was honestly sincere.

But, they aren't doing so and are more than happy to have states like Kentucky and other Red states carry the burden.

Does anyone stand to gain from this massive energy tax that is being imposed on us? Yes. Read on:

As if this weren’t enough, many on the left side of the political isle stand to make a massive profit off of the lie of manmade global warming. Al Gore’s carbon trade hedge fund investments alone stand to net him somewhere around one billion dollars. Not bad for the prophet of an inconvenient truth who lives in a mansion that uses 21 times the energy of the average American. Many other lobbyists and elected officials in Washington stand to score a major windfall off of this policy as well. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is betting a large portion of her already massive fortune on the passage of this bill. The list of Washington insiders who are heavily invested in companies that stand to make big cash from government subsidies under the cap and trade scheme is endless and continues to grow.

Again, if they believed that this were truly about the environment, they would give up the money and their lavish lifestyles and live like they are demanding Joe and Jane Average American live.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

No Kentuckian Should Support Cap And Trade
Leland Conway
Conservative Edge
June 14, 2009

Dr. James Hansen Admits The True Goal Of Global Warming Alarmists: Socialist Redistribution Of Wealth

They say there are two kinds of intelligence: Book smarts and Street smarts. Book smarts are good when you are trying to make a better living through self-improvment. Street smarts are essential when you want to live in the real world rather than some impossible-to-achieve fantasy world.

Dr. James Hansen of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies is the perfect example of someone who has book smarts, but has almost no street smarts whatsoever.

As evidence, I present a letter that Dr. Hansen wrote to Barack Obama in which he tells Obama how to use the Global Warming Hoax as a means to implement a socialist policy of wealth redistribution.

This isn't a joke. He wants a "carbon tax" on petroleum products believeing that such will encourage Americans to "move beyond fossil fuels." Here are some excerpts from his letter:

The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels.

Any first year economics student will be able to tell you that the "appropriate effect" will be artificial price increases all across the board. In other words, anything that uses fossil fuels to get from the producer to the consumer will go up in price. Gas, oil, food, clothing, construction costs, infrastructure costs, public services costs, etc. Everyone will be paying higher prices.

How does Hansen think the public will respond?

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend.

First, if Hansen honestly believes that Washington would enact any kind of tax without creating bureaucratic positions to oversee such a tax, then he really has no street smarts at all.

Second, why does it have a maximum share for two children? Is this Hansen's way of telling people how many children they are allowed to have? A way of implementing dictatorial population control?

Third, another thing that Hansen doesn't realize is that the ultimate effect of his proposal would be to subsidize the American people for paying higher fuel prices. In other words, force higher prices by enacting a tax, and then redistributing the tax proceeds so that people can turn around and pay the higher prices. There is no net gain there at all and nothing gets done. Money simply passes from one set of hands to the other and there is absolutely no productive result to show for the transfer.

And another point that shows how out of touch Hansen is with reality is that he actually makes the claim that paying higher fuel prices (and all other inflationary costs that result from such higher prices) would stimulate the economy!

Here is what he has to say about that:

A carbon tax is honest, clear and effective. It will increase energy prices, but low and middle income people, especially, will find ways to reduce carbon emissions so as to come out ahead.

Yeah, let's look at that one for a minute. What would low and middle income people do when costs increase but their paychecks remain the same? They cut back. They cut back on food purchases. They cut back on anything that involves transporting the kids. They cut back on educational resources. They cut back on shopping. They cut back on their recreational activities. They cut back on whatever vacation trips they had planned. In short, they cut back on anything that is affected by the artificial price increase that this lunatic tax would cause.

Again, as any first year economics student will tell you, the net result of all these cut backs is to cause the economy to shrink, but Hansen has completely deluded himself into believing that it will cause the economy to grow!

I don't know of any rationally thinking person who would agree that any of this would be good for low and middle income people.

The Greenhouse Effect Theory and its Anthropogenic Global Warming fellow travelers have been shown to be hoaxes by legitimate scientists as we see average global temperatures drop and record snowfalls thorughout the world. Now we know why the hoax is being perpetuated. Socialists like James Hansen are trying to convince socialists like Barack Obama to use the hoax as a power play for themselves and further wreck our economies as well as the dreams of low and middle income Americans.

This carbon tax is easily one of the most idiotic fantasies ever to be floated in political circles.

Also, proposals like this are a prime example of why Michael Crichton was so firm in his commitment to keeping politics and science completely separate.

You can access the original letter on-line here:

Hansen's Insane Proposal Published At Columbia University
Dr. James Hansen

And here is another blog entry regarding James Hansen's crackpot claims:

Dr. James Hansen Gets It Wrong Again
84rules
November 17, 2008

Now There Is A 'Carbon Tax' In The Bailout!

As if taking your money and giving it to Wall Street wasn't enough! Now they want to reach deeper into your wallet and take even more money from you! All for a manufactured crisis called "Climate Change" that the legitimate sceintific world has shown to be a natural phenomenon.

Check this out from Matthew Vadum at Capital Research Center:

If you look at page 180 of the 451-page monster bailout bill that easily passed the Senate yesterday (PDF here), you will see that it includes at Section 116 language about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide.” It also provides, at Section 117, for a “carbon audit of the tax code.” What could a provision about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide” and another provision about doing a “carbon audit” of the tax code possibly have to do with restoring confidence in Wall Street’s troubled credit markets? The answer: NOTHING. This appears to be an attempt by global warming fanatics to lay the foundation for an economy-killing carbon tax just like the “cap-and-tax” system that is now destroying European industry. If you think the Mother of All Bailouts is bad, just wait till you see the carbon tax. Get ready to reduce your standard of living drastically.

And the amount of money you have to take care of your family.

This bailout is getting worse and worse.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Hidden Carbon Tax Provisions In Paulson’s Bailout 2.0
Matthew Vadum
Capital Research Center
October 2, 2008