I’m not sure that George Shultz and Ted Halstead understand what an American Conservative actually is. I’m kinda doubting that Shultz’s old boss, Ronald Reagan would approve of a massive new federal tax. But, they keep pushing this. I have many posts on these Useful Idiots, such as here and here, the latter in the same Washington Post which is giving Shultz a platform yet again
The winning conservative climate solution
The Republican Party’s position on climate change is rapidly evolving, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) saying that we need conservative solutions and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) warning that the party ignores the issue at its own peril. Just Thursday, House Republican leadership, in its first policy conference of the year, presented a new climate strategy to GOP House members.
The newfound Republican climate position can be summarized as follows: The climate problem is real, the Green New Deal is bad and the GOP needs a proactive climate solution of its own. Our big question is what form it should take.
There are essentially three ways to reduce emissions — regulations, subsidies and pricing. The first is the worst of all options for a party committed to free markets and limited government. Many Republican legislators are, therefore, gravitating toward the second option: tax credits and research-and-development spending to promote innovation. Those now introducing legislation along these lines deserve praise.
Republicans are correct to focus on clean-energy innovation as a crucial driver of climate progress. But while subsidies are an important steppingstone in fostering nascent technologies, they are hardly the best way to stimulate innovation across the whole economy. As numerous studies show, subsidies are a costly means to drive clean tech deployment at scale, requiring ever-higher taxes and deficits to get the job done.
The winning Republican climate answer is the third option: carbon pricing. Just as a market-based solution is the Republican policy of choice on most issues, so should it be on climate change. A well-designed carbon fee checks every box of conservative policy orthodoxy. Not surprisingly, this is the favored option of corporate America and economists — including all former Republican chairs of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers.
So, wait, “carbon pricing”, which is essentially a tax, won’t drive up costs? Good luck with that. As I noted when he last pimped it in the WP and how it works
Each and every one of these things gives the Central Government more control of citizens, private entities, the energy sector, and the economy. Furthermore, it makes citizens more reliant and dependent on government, because the Helpful Hand of Government will refund some of the money lost to the taxes, fees, and cost of living increases.
Is this something Reagan would have supported? Or, would he have said “where’s the rock hard scientific evidence that Mankind is mostly/solely responsible for this? Let’s see it. Oh, you only have supposition, computer models, fear mongering, and looking into a crystal ball?”
Further, he might have asked why the people pushing this the hardest have the biggest carbon footprints. Why they don’t match their lives with their rhetoric. And why they seem to be pushing their beliefs on Everyone Else. Not particularly American Conservative, which is really Classical Liberalism, with the notion that “the government that governs least governs best.”
The Republican plan should be transparent along with what the Warmists want:Â “we’re going to tax and fee the hell out of citizens. We’re going to restrict your movement, dictate what you can buy, what you can eat, where you can live. We’re going to take over the energy sector and the economy. We’re going to skyrocket your cost of living. Limit you to one child. Maybe. It depends on your Beliefs. But, your leaders can do whatever they want. Y’all are good with that plan, right? Wait, you’re not? We thought you cared! No? Oh, you only care in theory, not practice. OK. Never mind.”
The perfect solution to the AGW problem for the GOP is simply to impose a very high tax on everyone. 90 percent income tax. 12 percent state tax. 10 percent sales tax and then a VAT of 25 percent.
All of this money is then sent to the UN where they will wisely use it to curb climate change. The USA will collapse and with it its percent of the c02 put in the air will be gone saving the world.
Simply eliminating the United States of America will solve the climate crisis.
I vote AYE. The AYES have it. Start Packing America. They are coming for everything we own. Guns, money, land, food. If you earned it, they want to take it from you!!!
Bernie 2020….because he took his honeymoon to the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALST REPUBLIC and cheered communism.
Sadly, there IS no solution to the Climate Crisis.
Happily, that’s because
There IS no crisis.
It’s all Bullshit..
The winning Republican climate answer is the third option: carbon pricing. Just as a market-based solution is the Republican policy of choice on most issues, so should it be on climate change. A well-designed carbon fee checks every box of conservative policy orthodoxy. Not surprisingly, this is the favored option of corporate America and economists — including all former Republican chairs of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers.
There was no mention of massive taxes.
Here’s an article in The Federalist about young conservatives who recognize the reality of global warming (as all Cons will eventually admit) and offer their conservative/capitalist approach to solving climate change. Their solution? Conservationism!
https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/12/gen-z-conservatives-are-fighting-climate-change-with-conservationism-and-capitalism/
Younger conservatives overwhelmingly recognize that global warming is happening and needs to be addressed but within the constraints of the modern conservative religion. Another suggestion is for conservatives to rename global warming to environmentalism, allowing cons to address climate change without giving libs credit!
Federalist is a Libertarian rag and Libertarians are just Democrats who want to keep the money taken from them in taxes.
Younger conservatives overwhelmingly recognize that global warming is happening and needs to be addressed but within the constraints of the modern conservative religion
If they overwhelmingly recognize that global warming is happening, they’re not Conservatives and the only political religion is the one that worships Karl Marx.
That’s you, sweetie.
Pant on fire there Elwood. Most people are wising up to the ruse. It’s a money/power grab.
Come on over to the Right side. We value truth.
Research more before you comment. Sound smarter.
The imposed “market” of carbon pricing IS a massive tax. Or do you think the government would show restraint for once?
If so, why should you be allowed to vote with that level of naivete?
Fortunately, conservatives don’t get to decide who votes. When the Trumpitistas take over will they only allow conservatives to vote?
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/20/17584376/carbon-tax-congress-republicans-cost-economy
Coal use in the US dropped because of market forces – coal became more expensive than natural gas. Funny how that works.
Natural gas was always cheap, but you might want to pick a more reliable source than Vox.
Of course, those “market forces” were called Democrats.
The very concerned Mr Dowd wrote:
No, there wouldn’t be, not in an article designed to push the idea. But the voters in very blue-state Washington apparently thought that the taxes were massive enough to have rejected, by landslide margin, Governor Jay Inslee’s Initiative 1631, which would have imposed a carbon tax of $15 per metric ton.
“There are essentially three ways to reduce emissions — regulations, subsidies and (imposed) pricing.”
Really? Then why have the US’s emissions been dropping without any of these? Oh, yeah the FOURTH option: actual markets plus technology. NG vs. coal, in this case.
Now, if the green weenies were SERIOUS about “emissions”, they’d be supporting nuclear power. They’re not. The conclusion is left to the student as an exercise.
The objective of the climate hoax is not to fix the climate but to punish capitalism for its success. Hence they refuse to promote the one best choice for cutting emissions and other pollution: nuclear power.
Trump 2020 Let’s start a nuclear initiative to build 2 power plants in each state by
2030.
Let’s start a nuclear initiative to build 2 power plants in each state by
2030.
Why bother, since global warming is a hoax?
Non sequitur, but nice to see you finally admit it.
Bother because the more energy we have the cheaper it becomes for us consumers, the more fossil energy we can export and the safer we are in case one or more energy streams is interrupted. It’s called diversity and it’s not just for anti white racists any more. Faux glowball warming has nothing to do with good energy decisions or at least it shouldn’t. Cost, security and quality of life are what I care about.
For some reason if a person seeks energy independence and improvement you only care about his motivation not his results. Real smart, but typical. Leftists never care about the misery they spread just their “good intentions”.
Trump 2020 More energy for us cause that makes us “white nationalists”.