Did You Know...


Bogus cap-and-trade statistic of the day

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

Global warming causes Sierra Club president to melt during Ted Cruz questions about ‘cooking’ planet

October 7, 2015 07:49 AM by Doug Powers


Access to “50/50” and “phone a friend” lifelines denied

Having solved all other problems, EPA warns about threat from sunny days

September 30, 2015 07:40 AM by Doug Powers



Obama’s Alaska trip to sound the global warming alarm has really turned into a snow job

September 27, 2015 10:51 AM by Doug Powers


“Staredown” worked!

Nancy Pelosi stands atop her Margaret Sanger Award and proudly proclaims ‘**we all support the sanctity of life’

September 25, 2015 02:34 PM by Doug Powers


**Subject to “interpretation” of course

Schwarzenegger: Air isn’t Democrat or Republican, so follow the Dems lead on ‘clean energy’

September 22, 2015 09:30 AM by Doug Powers


Been there, done that

Categories: Democrats, Enviro-nitwits, GOP, Hollyweird

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook