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

Awwwk-ward: EPA employees who called Senators to lobby against this nominee, meet your new boss!

February 17, 2017 01:40 PM by Doug Powers

doh

It’s never too late to be “promoted” to the Animas River cleanup crew!

Global warming about to cause tons of environmentally-conscious Standing Rock protesters’ garbage to turn toxic

February 8, 2017 04:28 PM by Doug Powers

garbage1

Re-creation of Obama’s first inaugural?

Report: EPA employees crying about Trump so much they might have to fine themselves for excessive facial runoff

January 27, 2017 08:24 PM by Doug Powers

nooooo

Trouble in bureaucrat paradise?


Categories: 2016 Campaign, Donald Trump, Enviro-nitwits, global warming

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook