From the Washington Examiner:
First, under Waxman-Markey, the government would establish a schedule of emissions reductions – 70 percent by 2030 – and a program of “credits†for businesses that meet the schedule. Those that don’t meet it can buy credits from companies that do, thus satisfying the government’s emission reduction mandate. The problem is that even under the most optimistic scenario, achieving the Waxman-Markey reductions would have only a negligible effect on global temperatures. Europe’s similar cap-and-trade program has been in effect for five years, yet has had no measurable impact on global temperatures. The U.S. effort is likely to fail, too, for the simply reason developing countries, particularly China and India, aren’t going to hobble their expanding economies, which will be dependent upon carbon-based fuels for the foreseeable future. Thus, at best, Waxman-Markey will reduce average global temperatures by much less than one degree.
That reduction highlights the second flaw, which is the excessive cost of achieving virtually no reduction in global temperatures. The conservative Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis used an econometric model of the U.S. economy to measure the projected impact of Waxman-Markey and found that by 2035, it would:
§ Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $7.4 trillion,
§ Destroy 844,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 1,900,000 jobs,
§ Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation,
§ Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent,
§ Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent,
§ Raise an average family’s annual energy bill by $1,500, and
§ Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 29 percent, or $33,400 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.That is a prescription for wrecking American prosperity for decades to come.
Nothing we haven’t heard — or, in my case, argued — before with respect to “global warming” / climate change / AGW, but worth repeating nevertheless because “progressives,” whose goal it is (by way of a performative, policy-driven question beg) to disprove American exceptionalism by working to hobble those economic and social principles that made the US exceptional to begin with, seem bent on seeing such faith-based initiatives through to law.
And because we are beginning to see specific outlines for policy, we are also able to see, by way of economic extrapolations, how the specific damage to the US economy will be done in terms of such completely predictable “sacrifices” as higher costs, fewer jobs, and ever-growing debt.
Were I a cynic, I might note that the endgame of “climate change science” is not the negligible drop in temperature climate scientists forecast as a result of these kinds of superficial carbon-emission reductions, but rather to destroy civilization altogether in order to really protect the earth.
Progress. Nuance.
****
update: Surprise! Most Americans aren’t in a rush to become government-enforced Druids.
Think about it — cutting our energy use by 70% over the next twenty years. Because, barring some miraculous tech breakthrough, that’s what cutting “emissions” means. We’d be poorer, less healthy, less free.
We’d, frankly, be a Third World country, in both our economy and our political structure. Do you think Waxman or Markey would travel less? Eat less? Live in houses barely above freezing? Our elites would be ever more elite, ever more insulated (literally!) from the masses.
The survivors among the masses would be damned lucky to have the strength to vote, let alone rebel. If it weren’t for all the guns floating around America, it would be a Progressive’s dream.
Reading into the poll highlighted at NRO, the next thing you know Americans will be demanding lower energy costs along with a greater abundance and availability, *GASP*, as though they might actually want economic growth, of all things!
The problem with polls like that is it assumes our government gives a rat’s ass.
But, it’s settled science Jeff.
“The Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade” — sounds like the name of some infernal machine out of a Victorian melodrama.
Except that when we’re all starving to death like Little Pearl in our dark, freezing cabins, the hero ain’t gonna show up to save us.
“Thus, at best, Waxman-Markey will reduce average global temperatures by much less than one degree”
No it won’t. AGW is a myth.
Damn Proles don’t know what’s good for them. They’ll learn eventually.
Oh yes, they’ll learn alright…
“…but rather to destroy civilization altogether in order to really protect the earth.”
Sorry, but even paleolithic culture is to advanced for these parasites.
Have you ever really looked at a stone arrowhead?
http://fossilbeach.com/NewStore/catalog/images/SingleArrowhead.jpg
BLASPHEMY! DEATH TO THE HERETIC!!!ONE1
Our elites would be ever more elite, ever more insulated (literally!) from the masses.
That’s exactly the idea.
I’ve argued before that these people are after a classic noble/peasant society, with a few members of the elite at the top and a mass of forelock-tugging menials hanging around the gate of the Big House on the Hill waiting for their handouts.
If you could set up such a society, the Pinch Sulzbergers of the world wouldn’t have to worry about some upstart destroying their (inherited and unearned) status with disruptive technologies and business practices. Such things may still be invented (albeit at a much slower rate) but they’ll benefit whichever noble happens to own the serf who creates the invention.
It’s an unholy alliance between those who consider themselves our betters through accident of birth and those who are perfectly content to be human cattle, as long as the food trough is always full and the shearing and/or slaughtering take place somewhere out of sight.
Both groups hate the middle class — the doletariat hates them because they provide a constant example that success isn’t simply due to luck, and the “elite” hates them because they’re the source of virtually all disruptive social change.
The republican form of government is inherently based on a strong middle class. To destroy the republic, one must destroy the middle class.
I beg to differ — the “elite” hate the middle class because the middle class quite often shows the “elite” up in terms of intelligence, personality, morality, hard work, and determination. It’s hard to maintain your self-image as one of the Betters when you’re constantly shown to be second rate.
There is a desperation for absolute stability among the “elite” — thus the drives to “save” the UAW and the “press” — but it pales compared to demands of their egos.
You act as if a post-modern version of a 14th Century feudal society based on subsistence farming is a bad thing? What are you, some kind of reactionary right-wing capitalist exploiter, or something?
Hmm… I’m not quite sure how that’s different from what I said, Rob.
Possibly just a different aspect of the same thing. The engines of change (which is what freedom — personal and market — is) threaten the status of the “elite” while the folks driving those engines quite often show themselves to be better people than the “elite”. Either way, the “elite” hate the middle class.
And, hell, I’ll admit to being a bit muddle-headed lately. A couple of weeks ago I read a whole bunch of books that did a hell of a job digging into this stuff — from the safety of fiction — and I’ve been trying to tease apart the two authors’ lines of argument. Between that and not sleeping or eating well lately, and my brain’s a bit fuzzy.
From a review of a book Insty linked this morning.
If the premise of the book is true, we can view Waxman-Markey as a shoehorn.
Why aren’t liberals voluntarily cutting back on their own energy use. Seriously. If I was concerned that my use of energy was killing the planet, I’d stop using my computer and I’d stop using my televsion.
Why are libs not doing this?
serr8d — that book is written as a push for things like Waxman-Markey:
In other words — punitive taxes on energy use, restrictions on personal mobility, and fascist diktat telling businesses how they can operate.
Why aren’t liberals voluntarily cutting back on their own energy use.
Because the stuff they do is important.
It’s important to fly halfway around the world to “raise awareness” of the latest hip cause.
They’re special people. Those rules are for ordinary people.
“Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/18 @ 2:00 pm #
Possibly just a different aspect of the same thing. The engines of change (which is what freedom — personal and market — is) threaten the status of the “elite†while the folks driving those engines quite often show themselves to be better people than the “eliteâ€. Either way, the “elite†hate the middle class.”
You won’t learn much about capitalism at a university. How could you? Capitalism is a matter of risks and rewards, and a tenured professor doesn’t have much to do with either.
-Jerry Pournelle
It would be a surpruise… if the ecotwats actually cared about “most Americans.”
Because they don’t believe a word of it.
Past a point, the environmental movement turned into a way to impose government control over our lives. My whole life has seen the environment improving, yet the predictions have gotten direr and direr. Further, the environmentalist movement has cited multiple mechanisms, multiple possible outcomes, and always demanded the same solution!
The ever-growing population will eat more than humanity can produce! The world will be covered with a population density of Bangladesh and we’ll be reduced to cannibalism! The government must take control of the economy!
We’re running out of raw materials! In twenty years we’ll be seeing shortages of even the most common items! The government must take control of the economy!
Particulates are going to filter out sunlight, cooling the planet and leading to a New Ice Age! Government must take control of the economy!
Our food supply is horribly tainted with pesticides and chemicals! Government must take control of the economy!
Carbon dioxide will hold the sun’s heat against the earth, turning the planet into a hothouse nightmare! Government must take control of the economy!
Many problems — often argued by the same people — always the same solution. Eventually you get the idea that it’s the solution that interests them, and the supposed problems are just tools.
Oh dear, you mean Al Gore is insincere??
Already happened, man.
Yes. But post-that, you’re describing one means by which the always-same solution is to be reached, not the solution.
The solution is — as solutions tend to be — “People unlike me will be destroyed.”
Environmentalism is one rationalization for that. But so is almost everything.
One of the big shows on a repeat cycle on History Channel. Is what it would be like if humankind suddenly vanished. You don’t produce a show and then replay it if it were of no concern to someone.
Yeah, “Life after Humans”, I saw it. It seems the critters we leave behind will be “negatively impacted” by the crap we left behind when we all mysteriously went “poof” one fine day.
Me, if I’m dead, I don’t give a shit what happens to some bears or tigers or whatever. Fuck them, they’re ON THEIR OWN!
I hope it passes. I hope all of their wonderful ideas pass. The more of their agenda gets implemented, the higher the chance that the mobs will eat them during the winter of 2012. And afterwards, after the left has been completely consumed, whenever someone expresses a leftist sentiment we will be able to refer to them as “thinking like an entree.”
#26
They’ll adapt. They always have and they always will.
I don’t think I’ll be able to adapt to this absolute pile of shit economy that the current resident has in store for us. What an impossibly stupid bunch of people we have running this country. I hate progs.
Whenever the words “Waxman-Markey” appear, I see Waxman’s Malarkey.
This is the economic environment our dipshit pezzydent wants to implement his dipshit cap and trade scheme what Mr. Soros told him he wanted. Barack could gaze and gaze at this chart and never never understand. Because he’s a stupid dirty socialist hungarian muppet what is lead around by a teleprompter attached to his nuts.
I think I meant *led*. Next time that’s what I’ll write I think.
I am looking forward to having the 52% looking at their heating bills in the coming years. Especially in the Rust Belt/Northeast.
If Washington, D.C., is Hollywood for ugly people, Waxman gets the starring role everytime. The fact that his district covers Beverly Hills is just meta.
C’mon, his nostrils would make a truffle hound envious.
And yes, I know ad hom is low class. Sue me.
Hell, I’d wager truffle pigs feel inadequate around him.
Prostetnic Vogon Waxman.
I plan on printing all the credits I need if this crap gets passed. I’m then going to take up smoking in restaurants to maximize my carbon usage. Intercourse the busybodies!
i was thinkin/ or…someone i know was
thinking
about going into guv’mint buildings
and smashing one of them there new mercury lite-bulbs
on the floor
they’d have to call out the hazmat team…
so/ my..uh..friend said..
Funny how people will bow down to computer models (that apparently can’t even accurately model the past) when it comes to “climate change” but not when it comes to the consequences of the “cure.”
[…] you blame ‘em? h/t commenter happyfeet on Jeff G’s post “Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade scheme will wreck U.S. economyâ€. happyfeet […]
[…] you blame ‘em? h/t commenter happyfeet on Jeff G’s post “Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade scheme will wreck U.S. economyâ€. happyfeet […]
Rush had a story last week about a Troy, MI project to produce the ultimate “green” house. Absolutely off the grid — all solar and wind power. Cost $900,000 to build. Intended to be a showcase for “green” development.
It’s closed because the pipes froze over the winter, severely damaging the floors.
But, hey, who could have predicted frozen pipes during a Michigan winter? After all, there’s global warming going on!
Rob,
Or the Feb issue of Architectural Digest touting the rebuilding efforts in New Orleans sponsored by Brad Pitt. Affordable housing in the worst blighted areas of whatever lower ward with oppressed minorities. Funny thing in the article was the pictures of the levees behind the houses. I’d say the ground was baou 9ft below the river level.
So the houses were built with escape hatches on the roofs.
Escape hatches.
Here you go poor person of color. A fucking … escape hatch.
Oh and all these green, recycled houses? They cost $200K. Affordable, my ass.
Madness.
OTT — good lord. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper to build with traditional materials on stilts?
Or, hell, story-and-a-half garages on the first floors?
*sigh*
Maybe I’m just thinking way outside the box here, but how about rebuilding the houses someplace above sea level?
That’s just crazy talk, .38+P
C and T is another power move by the president and his Democrat Congress. After all their policy moves are complete look and see capitalism as we know it will disappear. Once the dollars for tax collection disappear the nation might wake up and smell the roses. We got change that is for sure. I just hope that by 2010 the people are totally feed up with Un Consitutional presidential actione and absolutely stupid legislation by the Congress. To revive the economy may take many years, where or where will the high school and college graduates of the 2010 decade find jobs and where oh where will the medical care orginate, no dollars from tax and printing dollars will make them so cheap in value that even doctors won’t accept them. More off shore jobs for sale. But maybe a profit is not needed if the government is taking 70 to 90% for redistribution? Think about it.