Back in November, 2006 I contributed the inaugural post for Terra Rossa describing our blog as a place where conservatives could discuss a new energy future in which new jobs are created through research, Creation is protected through reduced greenhouse gas pollution, and our national security is improved through less dependence on foreign oil.
Today, nearly two years later, that future appears within our grasp. Both the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees support a cap & trade system that would accomplish these three goals.
To all my fellow conservative contributors — and you, our valued Terra Rossa readers — I’d like to say thank-you for making your views known here at Terra Rossa and plowing the ground for a new energy future to take seed and grow. Well done.
I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished here at Terra Rossa. And I’m confident a new energy future is just on the horizon.
This entry was posted on Friday, August 29th, 2008 at 12:27 pm and is filed under Cap and Trade, National Security, Oil and Gas, Politics/Government . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
What do people here think of Charles’ Krauthammer’s proposal for a revenue-neutral gas tax? The basic idea is a $1 per gallon gas tax to be offset by a cut to FICA taxes to make it revenue-neutral. He is more concerned with national security issues than environmental ones, hence his focus on oil (rather than a revenue-neutral carbon tax including coal, etc.)
January 5th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Wow. I see Arthur Laffer (of Laffer curve fame) and Bob Inglis (Republican Congressman from South Carolina) are out with a similar proposal. They argue for a revenue-neutral carbon tax offset by a decrease to payroll or income taxes. They would also add an import tax on countries without a similar carbon tax, notably India and China, to prevent the carbon production from simply being offshored. This too would be offset by a tax cut.
January 5th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
PS this blog favored cap-and-trade over a carbon tax at least in part based on a philosophical opposition to tax increases. Is that concern addressed by making the carbon tax revenue neutral? My impression is that a carbon tax would be simpler to implement and enforce, and also more efficient, than a cap-and-trade system. What do you think of Laffer and Inglis’ contention that cap-and-trade would be a “veiled” tax increase?
January 16th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Now Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon has endorsed a carbon tax:
March 10th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Depending less on foreign energy should be a goal of us all but have we thought out the carbon tax? Seems to me it’s a regressive tax effecting thoose who can least afford it. Electrical rates in Indiana are projected to increase 47% with the proposed cap and trade bill. Nothing you or I probably couldn’t afford, but what about the elderly person on Social Security going from $100 monthly to $147? Additionally, most food manufacturers with their emissions will be effected and I doubt they’ll just “eat” those additional costs. Scares thew pajeebees out of me.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Lynn DeArmond:
There’s no question that a carbon tax is regressive as you say. But that can be addressed by using the revenues from a new carbon tax to finance a cut to a different regressive tax such as payroll taxes and perhaps a supplement to Social Security for the elderly. Indeed, that’s what many have proposed, e.g. Krauthammer (see the link in my first comment).
I have to say 47% in Indiana sounds like a big increase in electricity rates. I guess it depends on how big the tax is and how much ability there is to switch to untaxed sources of electricity (nuclear, wind, hydro, geothermal, etc.) But hopefully the increase (and increases in heating, etc.) would be covered by an increase in the senior’s Social Security.
April 9th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
since global warming is not even proven, and oil reserves are not proven to be finnishing anytime soon are you politcians just using media as a tool to destroy all muslims as firstly you try to steal oil just becuase the US don’t want to feel less powerful as your depenant on it as a fuel and do you believe by using less fuel it will stop giving money to muslim countries such as iraq and iran and saudi arabia. which is why muslims are all percieved in media to be terrorists