Did You Know...

   

Bogus cap-and-trade statistic of the day

Share
By Michelle Malkin  •  June 23, 2009 02:51 PM

Conn Carroll does the math:

Most problematic is their complete omission of economic damage from restricting energy use. Footnote three on page four reads, “The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap. The reduction in GDP would also include indirect general equilibrium effects, such as changes in the labor supply resulting from reductions in real wages and potential reductions in the productivity of capital and labor).” That’s a pretty big chunk of change to ignore. In The Heritage Foundation’s analysis of the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation, the GDP hit in 2020 was $161 billion (2009 dollars). For a family of four, that is $1,870 that they ignore.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Posted in: Enviro-nitwits

Koch-a-geddon watch: Salon picks up slack for Harry Reid while he recovers

January 28, 2015 08:44 PM by Doug Powers

reid

Grateful for the assistance

Mayor of Bridgeport thanks Al Sharpton for ‘fighting the good fight’ against snow in January (I mean ‘climate change’)

January 27, 2015 08:33 PM by Doug Powers

bridgeport

Ridiculous we much

Al Gore and Pharrell are right, we need to take action against greenhouse gases — THEIRS

January 25, 2015 11:26 AM by Doug Powers

gorepharrell

Protégé

Mitt Romney to make minor tweaks to climate change stance until he’s elected president

January 23, 2015 09:15 PM by Doug Powers

romney1

Quadrennial

You’ve entered The Hypocrisy Zone: Billionaire Democrat wants YOU to downsize your lifestyle

January 22, 2015 10:32 AM by Doug Powers

mansion

Downsize, rubes!


Categories: Democrats, Enviro-nitwits, global warming

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook