Post by GringoBob on Jun 9, 2009 7:17:44 GMT -5
The Environmental Protection Agency has just completed their analysis of the cost impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade or "Climate Change Bill" and their conclusions, based on many very "rosy scenerios", is "Throughout the duration of the bill, the average annual cost per household would be merely $98-$140. At most, each household is paying less than $12 a month to "save the planet."
Two notable independent reviews of the same proposed legislation reach dramatically different conclusions - The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis (CDA) found that the cost of the energy tax is $4,600per year, per family of four, in future years and the CRA International for the National Black Chamber of Commerce projects that by 2030 Waxman-Markey would reduce national GDP by roughly $350 billon below the baseline level, cut net employment by 2.5 million jobs (even after accounting for new "green" jobs), and reduce an average household's annual purchasing power by $830.
So, once again you see the outright lies of "rosy scenerios" used in the economic terrorism assualt of the administration's "any tax is a good tax" mentality - don' take my word, read the report here = www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2470.cfm
The Heritage Foundation's CDA study and the analysis by CRA International used dynamic economic models that take a fuller account of the overall economic costs and benefits of this legislation. The modeling differences imply that technology is one of the fundamental cost drivers of the allowance price that the EPA did not seem to consider.
In short, the EPA's conclusion that Americans will be better shielded from the pain of capping carbon by this draft legislation is fantasy. Two major independent model analyses of Waxman-Markey have already confirmed this reality.
Find out why any Senator or Representative would ever support such a travasty of "greenmail" and vote out the "ayes"
Two notable independent reviews of the same proposed legislation reach dramatically different conclusions - The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis (CDA) found that the cost of the energy tax is $4,600per year, per family of four, in future years and the CRA International for the National Black Chamber of Commerce projects that by 2030 Waxman-Markey would reduce national GDP by roughly $350 billon below the baseline level, cut net employment by 2.5 million jobs (even after accounting for new "green" jobs), and reduce an average household's annual purchasing power by $830.
So, once again you see the outright lies of "rosy scenerios" used in the economic terrorism assualt of the administration's "any tax is a good tax" mentality - don' take my word, read the report here = www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2470.cfm
The Heritage Foundation's CDA study and the analysis by CRA International used dynamic economic models that take a fuller account of the overall economic costs and benefits of this legislation. The modeling differences imply that technology is one of the fundamental cost drivers of the allowance price that the EPA did not seem to consider.
In short, the EPA's conclusion that Americans will be better shielded from the pain of capping carbon by this draft legislation is fantasy. Two major independent model analyses of Waxman-Markey have already confirmed this reality.
Find out why any Senator or Representative would ever support such a travasty of "greenmail" and vote out the "ayes"