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

Leo DiCaprio’s dirty dollars

August 24, 2016 11:32 AM by Michelle Malkin

Of course: Louisiana floods give Bill Nye opportunity to extend predictability streak

August 23, 2016 08:18 PM by Doug Powers

billnye

Jackass continues jackassery

Behold the latest lefty idea to hold off climate change doom: Birth tax

August 19, 2016 01:15 PM by Doug Powers

gorethumbsup

Did somebody say money!?

Hillary’s Headhunter: Sleazeball Ken Salazar

August 17, 2016 08:08 AM by Michelle Malkin


Categories: Al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Enviro-nitwits, global warming, Terrorist attacks, War

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook