What part of “revenue-neutral carbon tax” don’t you understand? After all, the post you cite at our Carbon Tax Center Web site, by James Handley, used that phrase three times. And “revenue-neutral” is all over our site.

Or do you oppose even a revenue-neutral carbon tax? Why on Earth would you (or anyone), considering the close-to-zero administrative cost of a carbon tax and its enormous “co-benefits” (less traffic, less coal mining, less air pollution, less oil dependence)?

As for the success of cap-and-trade in curbing sulfur emissions, we acknowledge that on our Web site. We also take pains to explain why, crucially, carbon ain’t sulfur.

Could we respectfully ask you to do a bit more reading before firing, next time? Thanks.