Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Senator Sheldon Whitehouse - Time to Wake Up: GOP Opposition to Climate Science” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:
**************************************
ABSTRACT: Orlo Stitt (2013) of the Physoc list has called attention to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s speech “Time to Wake Up: GOP Opposition to Climate Science” at http://1.usa.gov/13mbZsV. Therein Whitehouse says:
(1) “How wise is it for the Republican Party to wed itself to the deniers and proclaim that climate change is a hoax?”
(2) “I’m willing to do a carbon pollution fee that sets the market in balance, and returns every single dollar to the American people. No new agencies. No new taxes. No bigger government. Every dollar back. Just a balanced market, with the costs included in the price, which will make better energy choices, increase jobs, and prevent pollution."
In my opinion, regarding:
“1”: Whitehouse is correct in asserting that the Republican Party has “wed itself to the [climate change] deniers.” At http://bit.ly/11p423a are the quotes of 23 Senators (all Republicans, 50% of the 46 Republicans in the Senate) and 81 Congressmen (all Republicans, 35% of the 234 Republicans in the House) who deny the deleterious effects of anthropomorphic climate change. Their uninformed statements indicate their appalling science illiteracy and that of the voters who elected them.
Unfortunately, Democrats in Congress are almost as unenlightened as Republicans - see “Few Democrats In Congress Support Capps Climate Legislation” (IT, 2013) at http://bit.ly/13NDgn3 - hence Hansen's (2013) proposal at http://huff.to/13gcjcR for a new “American Party.”
“2”: Whitehouse is in the economically sagacious company of: (a) conservatives George Schultz and Gary Becker (2013) in “Why We Support a Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax” at http://bit.ly/11ZoaOr; and (b) James Hansen (2013) in “The Courage to Fight Climate Change” [Hansen & Romm (2013)] at http://bit.ly/12djtSf.
**************************************
To access the complete 46 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/100EVIY.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”
-Worthy of - but misattributed http://bit.ly/13hZKMD to - Plato (427-347 BC)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 09 June 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. “Senator Sheldon Whitehouse - Time to Wake Up: GOP Opposition to Climate Science” online on the OPEN! Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/100EVIY. Post of 8 Jun 2013 19:40:10-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being distributed to various discussion lists.
Showing posts with label American Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Party. Show all posts
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
The Carbon Tax: Merely a Ploy for Wealth Redistribution?
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “The Carbon Tax: Merely a Ploy for Wealth Redistribution?” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:
**************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my discussion-list post “Would a Carbon Tax Save Life on Planet Earth?” [Hake (2013)] at http://yhoo.it/16ECfUn, David Marx at http://bit.ly/14fAjhl wrote: “Now, we finally get to the real purpose of carbon caps and taxes . . . . . . . IT'S ALL ABOUT WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION. . . . .” [My CAPS.]
James Hansen, in his article “The American Party” at http://huff.to/13gcjcR had this to say about “wealth/income redistribution” (paraphrasing): “Yes, the Carbon Tax is progressive: some ambitious low-income people who pay special attention to their carbon footprint will be able to save money for other purposes, wealthy people will pay more in added costs than they receive in the dividend. However, the added cost to them is small compared with change of income tax rates -- and lower income tax rates would be much more likely when the economy improves as the system moves toward honest pricing of fossil fuels. . . . . . . . . After I spoke to a group of conservative politicians, one of them said ‘THAT’S INCOME REDISTRIBUTION!’ ” [My CAPS.]
But not all conservatives are so disposed - see e.g., the WSJ piece “Why We Support a Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax” at http://bit.ly/11ZoaOr, by George Shultz http://bit.ly/ZOTqiJ and Gary Becker http://bit.ly/ZtDT5I, both senior fellows at the conservative Hoover Institution http://bit.ly/SPGxwb.
**************************************
To access the complete 9 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/13FUcvQ.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm
REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 05 June 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. “The Carbon Tax: Merely a Ploy for Wealth Redistribution?” online on the OPEN! Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/13FUcvQ. Post of 05 Jun 2013 11:23:12-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
**************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my discussion-list post “Would a Carbon Tax Save Life on Planet Earth?” [Hake (2013)] at http://yhoo.it/16ECfUn, David Marx at http://bit.ly/14fAjhl wrote: “Now, we finally get to the real purpose of carbon caps and taxes . . . . . . . IT'S ALL ABOUT WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION. . . . .” [My CAPS.]
James Hansen, in his article “The American Party” at http://huff.to/13gcjcR had this to say about “wealth/income redistribution” (paraphrasing): “Yes, the Carbon Tax is progressive: some ambitious low-income people who pay special attention to their carbon footprint will be able to save money for other purposes, wealthy people will pay more in added costs than they receive in the dividend. However, the added cost to them is small compared with change of income tax rates -- and lower income tax rates would be much more likely when the economy improves as the system moves toward honest pricing of fossil fuels. . . . . . . . . After I spoke to a group of conservative politicians, one of them said ‘THAT’S INCOME REDISTRIBUTION!’ ” [My CAPS.]
But not all conservatives are so disposed - see e.g., the WSJ piece “Why We Support a Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax” at http://bit.ly/11ZoaOr, by George Shultz http://bit.ly/ZOTqiJ and Gary Becker http://bit.ly/ZtDT5I, both senior fellows at the conservative Hoover Institution http://bit.ly/SPGxwb.
**************************************
To access the complete 9 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/13FUcvQ.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm
REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 05 June 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. “The Carbon Tax: Merely a Ploy for Wealth Redistribution?” online on the OPEN! Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/13FUcvQ. Post of 05 Jun 2013 11:23:12-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
