Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan  (Read 35642 times)

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #150 on: March 13, 2017, 10:47:12 PM »
Make it a $100 per ton and dividend it back on a per capita basis, a huge "middle and working class tax cut". Should also have a surcharge for extra-heavy personal users - personal yachts, rolls royces, first class airline passengers etc. Would add a good bit of "populism", if only Bernie had led with that!

This would greatly increase the cost of long supply chains, forcing some activities to be done much closer to the point of final constriction/consumption - relocalization and "bringing the jobs home". How can this not be a winning proposition if sold correctly?!
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 05:09:20 AM by rboyd »

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #151 on: April 04, 2017, 05:52:42 AM »
Ontario just completed their first carbon credit auction for their Cap & Trade system. They raised $472 million CDN with all available credits sold. Reserve price was $18 and the final median price was about $19 per credit.

By law all proceeds must be used on carbon mitigation programs. There will be 4 auctions each year.

Not all businesses need to buy credits because for the first few years vulnerable industries receive free credits. The list of companies buying credits reads like a who's who of the fossil fuel industry plus a few municipalities (who I guess own fossil fuel powered generators).

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #152 on: April 04, 2017, 04:47:18 PM »
Ontario's electricity generation is already very clean - no coal and only 6.7% natural gas. A lot of natural gas used for space heating though (unlike Quebec which uses hydro-electricity for this - shame Ontario not driving faster to do this), as well as all those ICE's propelling people and stuff around.

https://www.ontarioenergyreport.ca/pdfs/5924_IESO_Q2OER2016_Electricity.pdf

The Cap & Trade has added 4.3 cents per litre for gasoline and $80 per year for an average home heating, plus indirect costs. Still an issue with trying to do this on a local level though, with other jurisdictions not having any carbon taxes or Cap and Trade. You end up subsidizing some of the big polluters to stop them moving, same issue as seen in Germany. "Most large emitters in Ontario are receiving allowances for free until 2020, which the government says is meant to prevent them from moving to jurisdictions without carbon pricing"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ontario-cap-and-trade-first-auction-1.4053437

All monies from the Ontario Cap & Trade go to a green investment fund, which seems to be better targeted than the California bullet train initiative. Still too low a strike price though, just like the low Government of Canada proposed carbon tax.

http://energyinsider.ca/index.php/details-of-ontarios-cap-and-trade-program-coming-soon-but-plans-to-spend-the-proceeds-are-already-being-announced/

Plan is to integrate with the Quebec and California Cap & Trade markets, which have had a lot of volatility - with many unsold permits. Its accepted that the auctions will be very volatile. Seems to be a problem in California with trading on secondary markets and an ongoing challenge to the Cap & Trade policies.

http://energyinsider.ca/index.php/a-return-to-poor-results-in-the-latest-californiaquebec-carbon-credit-auction/

P.S. I live in Ontario


« Last Edit: April 04, 2017, 04:59:27 PM by rboyd »

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #153 on: April 05, 2017, 01:13:45 AM »
Just a couple of notes to add: In Ontario the price of gas fluctuates more than 5 cents/liter every week as a regular thing. It peaks Friday as the weekend approaches and drops Sunday evening with a smaller bump mid-week. So it will take years of declining cap for the price of credits to make a difference in gasoline prices.

Natural gas is a different story. The carbon cost is a much larger percentage of price compared to gasoline. However, $80/year won't change the economics of improving house efficiency. It also won't tip the balance towards heat pumps for heat over natural gas until there is a much lower carbon cap and higher carbon credit prices.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #154 on: May 20, 2017, 07:50:02 PM »
Virginia Moves to Regulate Power Plants' Carbon Pollution, Defying Trump
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe on Tuesday announced an ambitious plan to cut carbon pollution from the state's power plants, taking a stand against the Trump administration's continued efforts to dismantle carbon-cutting regulations.

McAuliffe issued an executive order directing state environmental regulators to begin creating a market-based carbon-trading program. The mandatory cap-and-trade program would become the third in the country, after California's statewide carbon compliance market and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a cap-and-trade program consisting of nine states in the northeast. The Virginia program would likely be linked to either of these trading programs.

"The threat of climate change is real, and we have a shared responsibility to confront it," McAuliffe said.

"Once approved, this regulation will reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the Commonwealth's power plants and give rise to the next generation of energy jobs," he said. "As the federal government abdicates its role on this important issue, it is critical for states to fill the void."

The order calls for state regulators to create a legal framework for emissions trading. A proposed rule with details of the plan is expected this December, shortly before McAuliffe's term ends, and a rulemaking process will follow....
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/16052017/virginia-mcauliffe-climate-change-cap-and-trade-carbon-emissions-trading-trump
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #155 on: May 28, 2017, 08:33:35 PM »
“States are looking to these programs; they don’t want to be missing out on all the benefits the RGGI states and California have been seeing for revenue to be reinvested in clean energy initiatives and infrastructure needs,” Stutt says.

Obama’s Clean Power Plan Might Be Dead In D.C., But States Are Rebuilding It Themselves
https://www.fastcompany.com/40422642/obamas-clean-power-plan-might-be-dead-in-d-c-but-states-are-rebuilding-it-themselves
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #156 on: May 30, 2017, 04:29:36 PM »
Colorado regulators seize the climate fight in landmark ruling on carbon costs
The PUC's March decision is the first application of the federal social cost of carbon in utility planning processes
This spring, Colorado utility regulators issued a landmark decision requiring Xcel Energy to include the health and environmental costs of greenhouse gas emissions in its integrated resource plans.

On March 23, the Public Utility Commission (PUC) ordered Xcel to use the federal social cost of carbon (SCC) to measure harms from CO2 emissions in its 2016 Energy Resource Plan (ERP), which will guide utility investments through 2024.

The ink barely had time to dry on the order before President Trump issued an executive order on March 28 withdrawing the SCC guidance developed under the Obama administration as “no longer representative of governmental policy.”

The divide between federal and state policy goals is a worry for Xcel, which argues the politics of the SCC and its underlying calculations are too tenuous to be the basis for utility investments.

“The range of potential outcomes is huge for the calculation of the social cost of carbon because the uncertainties are huge,” said Jack Ehle, Xcel’s director of environmental policy. The Obama administration “came up with values ranging from $13/ton [of carbon emitted] to $129/ton in 2022.”

But federal backtracking on the SCC does not bother the clean energy and environmental advocates who pushed for its inclusion in the planning process. They say the PUC’s order and the underlying calculations of the SCC are clear, even if the Trump administration halts further analysis.

“Like most things in the best utility regulation, this is a mix of policy, economic, and legal questions,” said Erin Overturf, attorney at Western Resource Advocates (WRA). “But the ruling explicitly states that Xcel is to use a $43/ton value in 2022 and escalate that to $69/ton in 2050.”
...
http://www.utilitydive.com/news/colorado-regulators-seize-the-climate-fight-in-landmark-ruling-on-carbon-co/443186/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12747
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #157 on: May 30, 2017, 05:18:16 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Sky-high carbon tax needed to avoid climate catastrophe, say experts".  Now, if only decision makers would listen to this ESLD advise:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/29/sky-high-carbon-tax-needed-to-avoid-catastrophic-global-warming-say-experts

Extract: "A group of leading economists warned on Monday that the world risks catastrophic global warming in just 13 years unless countries ramp up taxes on carbon emissions to as much as $100 (£77) per metric tonne.

Experts including Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz and former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern said governments needed to move quickly to tackle polluting industries with a tax on carbon dioxide at $40-$80 per tonne by 2020."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #158 on: May 31, 2017, 03:31:44 AM »
$100 is only "sky high" compared to the ridiculously low cost of carbon used in most countries. $100 should be a minimum. As a fee and dividend would force a reorientation of economic activity away from fossil fuels.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #159 on: June 01, 2017, 05:39:15 PM »
$3 per ton of CO2 in US Regional Cap & Trade System]$3 per ton of CO2 in US Regional Cap & Trade System

The problem with cap and trade versus a carbon fee, the price of carbon can rapidly fall if targets are exceeded. In this case, heavily by the use of natural gas (if we priced for CO2e instead could be quite different) as well as renewables. Better to have a fixed price that keeps driving the move away from renewables.

The other issue was the low-bar goal of a 10% reduction in emissions, far too easy for the sector to meet.

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/rggi-auction-price-co2-emissions-reached-record-low-2014-us.html
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 06:09:56 PM by rboyd »

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #160 on: June 02, 2017, 01:26:15 AM »
IF the emissions are dropping faster than the cap you don't need a higher price. The point of a price and a declining cap is the carbon emission reduction. No need to punish success. Reason for cap and trade is it is more effective at lower prices than a straight emissions tax.

Looks easy to meet target of 80% reduction by 2050 without raising the price prematurely.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #161 on: June 02, 2017, 03:01:13 AM »
The real problem was the low target (10%) and the lack of measuring CO2e (i.e. the fugitive methane emissions of natural gas).

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #162 on: June 16, 2017, 12:05:27 PM »
40 countries are making polluters pay for carbon pollution. Guess who's not.
Animated map in the linked article shows the steady, inexorable spread of carbon pricing.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/6/15/15796202/map-carbon-pricing-across-the-globe
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #163 on: June 29, 2017, 08:53:26 PM »
Here's how California could change its cap-and-trade program for climate change

Possible changes to the California Cap & Trade scheme that will greatly reduce the possibility of price crashes, drives up the price year by year, and turns it into a "Cap, Trade & Dividend" scheme.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-cap-trade-ideas-20170511-htmlstory.html




Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #164 on: July 18, 2017, 12:41:01 PM »
From the Paris Agreement thread:

California Legislature extends state's cap-and-trade program in rare bipartisan effort to address climate change
California lawmakers voted Monday evening to extend the state’s premiere program on climate change, a victory for Gov. Jerry Brown that included unprecedented Republican support for fighting global warming.

In a break with party leaders and activists in California and Washington, eight Republicans joined with Democrats to continue the cap-and-trade program, which requires companies to buy permits to release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

The legislation would keep the 5-year-old program operating until 2030, providing a key tool for meeting the state’s ambitious goal for slashing emissions. Cap and trade also generates important revenue for building the bullet train from Los Angeles to San Francisco, another priority for the governor....
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-climate-change-vote-republicans-20170717-story.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #165 on: July 26, 2017, 09:44:34 PM »
Tuesday, July 25, 2017   
California's Governor Brown Signs Landmark Climate Bill to Extend the State's Cap-and-Trade Program
SAN FRANCISCO – Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today signed AB 398 by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia (D-Coachella), which extends and improves the state’s world-leading cap-and-trade program to ensure California continues to meet its ambitious climate change goals.
 
“California is leading the world in dealing with a principal existential threat that humanity faces,” said Governor Brown at today's signing ceremony. “We are a nation-state in a globalizing world and we’re having an impact and you’re here witnessing one of the key milestones in turning around this carbonized world into a decarbonized, sustainable future.”
 
The Governor signed the legislation today on Treasure Island, the same location where Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32 (the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006), which authorized the state’s cap-and-trade program more than a decade ago.
...
AB 398 strengthens and extends the state's cap-and-trade program, which would have expired without legislative action. The program, along with other state carbon reduction measures, ensures California will meet its SB 32 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
...
http://cert1.mail-west.com/yjfE/msR/c7r/Rgtmyuzjanm/j151s/sRcn2q8jeggl0/ul151sRqvnq/240ygbx9j/anum
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #166 on: July 27, 2017, 03:46:03 AM »
U.S.:  The conservative think tank, American Enterprise Institute, will sign on to Senators Whitehouse's carbon fee legislation!  $49/ton to start. Revenue neutral.

AMERICAN OPPORTUNITY CARBON FEE ACT INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS
Legislation would fight climate change and generate revenue to boost the economy, help American consumers

Today, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Congressmen Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and David Cicilline (D-RI) introduced legislation to place a price on the carbon pollution driving global climate change and putting Americans’ health and safety at risk.  The American Opportunity Carbon Fee Act, which Schatz and Whitehouse will unveil at the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday afternoon, would significantly lower the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions while generating substantial revenue to boost the economy and aid American consumers.
...
According to the independent, nonpartisan think tank Resources for the Future, the bill would reduce energy-related carbon dioxide emissions by 36 percent compared to 2005 levels by 2025.  By the middle of the next decade, it would lead the United States to beat its carbon emissions targets set forth in the 2016 Paris Agreement pledge, Resources for the Future found, and it would deliver more than twice the utility-sector carbon reductions by 2030 than the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan.
...
https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/american-opportunity-carbon-fee-act-introduced-in-congress

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #167 on: July 31, 2017, 04:29:49 PM »
In Split Decision, Minnesota Adopts Modified SCC For Use In Utility Planning
– The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission voted 3-2 to raise that cost from the current level of 44 cents to $4.53 per short ton to a range of $9.05 to $43.06 per short ton by 2020. An interesting note – the two dissenting votes actually voted for a higher cost. I do still have a bit of confusion on the ruling – the range of $9-43/ton – does that upper range actually go into effect today? How exactly is it applied? The range is based upon whether we calculate damages through 2100 versus 2300 (wow!). If applied directly to the cost of various energy sources: 0.4-2.5¢/kWh for gas electricity, 0.9-4.3¢/kWh for coaland 8.2-39¢/gallon for gasoline. As an aside – these numbers don’t include climate change issues – but pollution/health costs
https://electrek.co/2017/07/31/egeb-minnesota-social-cost-texas-vermont-solar-storage/

http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-regulators-increase-social-cost-of-co2-emissions-but-not-as-much-as-asked/437066353/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12747
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #168 on: August 18, 2017, 04:59:54 PM »
By using part of the proposed dividend to give a tax break to the rich (who have significant political power), it may be politically possible to pass a carbon fee and dividend plan within the next year or so:

"Some Democrats See Tax Overhaul as a Path to Taxing Carbon"

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/climate/carbon-tax-reform-climate-change.html

Extract: "With a sweeping overhaul of the tax code on the horizon, two Senate Democrats believe this is the moment to broach the third rail of climate change policy: a carbon tax.

The plan by the senators, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Brian Schatz of Hawaii, to level a $49 per metric ton fee on greenhouse gas emissions is widely acknowledged as a long shot. But the lawmakers, along with climate activists and a cadre of conservative supporters, insist the tax reform is a way to create bipartisan support. The senators propose to use a portion of the estimated $2.1 trillion they anticipate in carbon tax revenue over the first 10 years to reduce the top marginal corporate tax income rate, something the White House has called for."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2108
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #169 on: August 18, 2017, 06:10:41 PM »
I would advise not getting hopes up.

If Republicans are going to attempt to ram through a "new tax plan" in the remaining weeks of this legislature it's like to be a ham-handed job that will do pretty much nothing except cut taxes on the rich (corporations and individuals).  There have been no committee hearings, no drafts presented for study and debate.

Odds are very high that what we'll see is "shovel more gold to the rich and starve the programs that protect the non-wealthy".  That is what this Republican Congress is all about.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #170 on: August 19, 2017, 10:51:28 PM »
By using part of the proposed dividend to give a tax break to the rich (who have significant political power), it may be politically possible to pass a carbon fee and dividend plan within the next year or so: The senators propose to use a portion of the estimated $2.1 trillion they anticipate in carbon tax revenue over the first 10 years to reduce the top marginal corporate tax income rate, something the White House has called for."

Carbon Fee and Dividend To The Rich the shape of things to come?

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2108
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #171 on: August 19, 2017, 11:50:29 PM »
Climate change is a more important issue (IMHO) than the 1% getting a bit richer.

Unreasonable unequal wealth distribution is a problem we should deal with separately.  Let's not take our eye off the immense disaster coming our way.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1384
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #172 on: August 20, 2017, 05:30:10 AM »
The smaller the dividend returned to the average citizen, the more difficult it will be to sell to them. Any suggestion that the fat cats are sucking it off will backfire there. But of course, in the USA, it doesnt matter what the average citizen thinks as we see from Gilens and Page (2014)

doi:10.1017/S1537592714001595

I attach two panels of Fig. 1 from the paper, which states:

" ... economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence."

"Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all."

" ... our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts."

So this ripoff can probably pass, since it benefits the rich, but the legislators who vote for it will pay a price at the polls. The price may be too dear, that remains to be seen.

The paper is open access. read all about it.

sidd
« Last Edit: August 20, 2017, 05:41:47 AM by sidd »

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9068
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #173 on: September 13, 2017, 06:33:10 PM »
States Are Using Social Cost of Carbon in Energy Decisions, Despite Trump's Opposition
The social cost of carbon was an arcane but important tool in the federal climate toolbox until President Donald Trump targeted it in his sweeping March 2017 executive order to weaken climate actions.

Now, states are taking up the metric.

Policymakers and regulators in several states, including New York, Minnesota, Illinois and Colorado, are using the social cost of carbon to measure and reduce CO2 impacts from their power grids. Some are using it to compensate rooftop solar panel owners who feed low-carbon power in the grid. Others use it to incentivize nuclear power and renewable energy. Their efforts, aimed at reducing planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, come as Congress and the Trump administration try to restrict its use.

"It's been striking to see the progress on this front even as the Trump administration has tried to undermine the use of a social cost of carbon," said Rachel Cleetus, chief economist and manager of the climate program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11082017/states-climate-change-policy-calculate-social-cost-carbon
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #174 on: September 14, 2017, 05:33:35 PM »
Using the social cost of carbon is a good move, but that cost is seriously underestimated by the Integrated Assessment Models used to calculate the cost - due to:
- The discount rate, as mentioned in the article
- Dependence on the out of date UN IPCC data and scenarios
- Assumption of an infinite ability to add renewable energy
- Low-balling the impacts of climate change, and assuming that economic growth continues

The latter is a big one. For example using the square of the temperature rise as the cost (e.g. 1 degree = 1% GDP, 4 degrees = 16% GDP) and deducting that from an economic size assumed to have substantially grown in the future. Most scientists would agree that 4 degrees equals the end of modern civilization, so 16% of GDP seems to be a very lowball figure (6 degrees is only 36%!).

Use more realistic assumptions and $200+ becomes the social cost of carbon. Of course, that would not be politically acceptable.


AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12747
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #175 on: September 15, 2017, 05:33:14 PM »
The linked reference provide evidence that there is public willingness to pay a US carbon tax.  Now all we need to do is to elect some leaders in the USA with some moral fiber:

Matthew J Kotchen, Zachary M Turk and Anthony A Leiserowitz (13 September 2017),
"Public willingness to pay for a US carbon tax and preferences for spending the revenue", Environmental Research Letters, Volume 12, Number 9, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa822a

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa822a

Abstract: "We provide evidence from a nationally representative survey on Americans' willingness to pay (WTP) for a carbon tax, and public preferences for how potential carbon-tax revenue should be spent. The average WTP for a tax on fossil fuels that increases household energy bills is US$177 per year. This translates into an average WTP of 14% more on average for households across the United States, where energy costs differ significantly across states. Regarding the tax revenues, Americans are most in support of using the money to invest in clean energy and infrastructure. There is relatively less support for reducing income or payroll taxes, returning dividends to households, and other expenditure categories. Finally, Americans support using the tax revenues to assist displaced workers in the coal industry enough to compensate each miner nearly US$146 000 upon passage of a carbon tax."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Fee & Dividend Plan
« Reply #176 on: September 15, 2017, 08:14:01 PM »
The general public in the US has very little impact on government policy, if they did the US would have single payer healthcare already (poll after poll has shown big majorities for this over many years). Its the elites that make the difference, and they have never seen a tax they don't hate it seems.