Cap and Trade Lie

Canceled2

Banned
October 04, 2009

Caught in a lie

The Treasury Department has been sitting on some data that gives the lie to the administration claim that the cap and trade bill will not substantially affect the average American taxpayer.
 
October 04, 2009

Caught in a lie

The Treasury Department has been sitting on some data that gives the lie to the administration claim that the cap and trade bill will not substantially affect the average American taxpayer.

With this information out in the open, Cap 'n' Tax doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing, and Obama will go down in history as one of the most ineffective, pathetic Presidents in history.
 
With this information out in the open, Cap 'n' Tax doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing, and Obama will go down in history as one of the most ineffective, pathetic Presidents in history.

NAH!!

What will hurt, is when everyone find out that it will affect ONE AND ALL and not just those fell for "hope and change" are hoping they have some change left over.
 
With this information out in the open, Cap 'n' Tax doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing, and Obama will go down in history as one of the most ineffective, pathetic Presidents in history.

The professional campaigner...the community organizer who couldn't.
 
If cap and trade has the intended effect, and it is not at all clear to me thatit will, of course it will affect everyone.

If it doesn't pinch your shoes a little it won't matter.
 
If cap and trade has the intended effect, and it is not at all clear to me thatit will, of course it will affect everyone.

If it doesn't pinch your shoes a little it won't matter.

Tell that to those you keep saying you're trying to help, when their job closes and they now have nothing.

Liberals are heartless bastards who fail to consider the ramifications of their behavior, until it's to late, and then they make excuses as to why it didn't work.

Liberals equate to elitist.
 
If cap and trade has the intended effect, and it is not at all clear to me thatit will, of course it will affect everyone.

If it doesn't pinch your shoes a little it won't matter.

An experiment that will pinch American families in their energy costs 1,700.00 a year with untold consequences to business sectors that in turn will impact consumers wallets negatively. This whole thing is a scheme imo to shift the power paradigm (wealth) from one group (capitalist's) to another (socialists).
 
The sad thing is they will try to do this anyway.

They want to collapse the economy and then bailout the politically correct citizens.

Free thinkers and white people need not apply.
 
This is the beginning of the final push for the New World Order.

We must remain vigilant. The failure of the internationalist fascists is imminent.
 
If cap and trade has the intended effect, and it is not at all clear to me thatit will, of course it will affect everyone.

If it doesn't pinch your shoes a little it won't matter.

In any case, that rumor was debunked weeks ago.

"...Nowhere in the documents does the Treasury Department cite the $1,761 figure. It seems Alexander got that number from a Sept. 15, 2009, story by Declan McCullagh, a blogger who writes the "Taking Liberties" column for CBS News. (Our calls to Alexander's office were not returned.) So it's worth noting that Alexander is relying not on a study by an economist, but on an estimate from a blogger.

"The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent," McCullagh wrote. "A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year."

We contacted McCullagh via e-mail, and he told us that he came up with $1,761 per household annually by simply dividing the number $200 billion by the number of households in the United States. According to the census, there are about 113.5 million households in the country this year.

We reviewed the estimate with people involved in the climate change debate who told us there are significant flaws in McCullagh's methodology. Stephen Seidel, vice president for policy analysis and general counsel for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, said the math is too simple and doesn't reflect the true impact of the House bill, which specifies that any revenue from the plan be rebated to consumers to offset higher electrical bills they might have to pay..."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...der-claims-cap-and-trade-will-cost-consumer-/
 
In any case, that rumor was debunked weeks ago.

"...Nowhere in the documents does the Treasury Department cite the $1,761 figure. It seems Alexander got that number from a Sept. 15, 2009, story by Declan McCullagh, a blogger who writes the "Taking Liberties" column for CBS News. (Our calls to Alexander's office were not returned.) So it's worth noting that Alexander is relying not on a study by an economist, but on an estimate from a blogger.

"The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent," McCullagh wrote. "A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year."

We contacted McCullagh via e-mail, and he told us that he came up with $1,761 per household annually by simply dividing the number $200 billion by the number of households in the United States. According to the census, there are about 113.5 million households in the country this year.

We reviewed the estimate with people involved in the climate change debate who told us there are significant flaws in McCullagh's methodology. Stephen Seidel, vice president for policy analysis and general counsel for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, said the math is too simple and doesn't reflect the true impact of the House bill, which specifies that any revenue from the plan be rebated to consumers to offset higher electrical bills they might have to pay..."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...der-claims-cap-and-trade-will-cost-consumer-/

How is the math too simple?
 
How is the math too simple?

Read the article. I'm not going to spoon-feed it to you.

"...doesn't reflect the true impact of the House bill, which specifies that any revenue from the plan be rebated to consumers to offset higher electrical bills they might have to pay.

"What [Treasury] was looking at was a situation where 100 percent of the permits were auctioned, and ignored what would be done with revenue," he said. The Waxman-Markey bill "uses revenue to offset cost to consumers."
 
Read the article. I'm not going to spoon-feed it to you.

"...doesn't reflect the true impact of the House bill, which specifies that any revenue from the plan be rebated to consumers to offset higher electrical bills they might have to pay.

"What [Treasury] was looking at was a situation where 100 percent of the permits were auctioned, and ignored what would be done with revenue," he said. The Waxman-Markey bill "uses revenue to offset cost to consumers."

it will offset costs? That's not enough when it's also driving whole businesses overseas. you're saying they will destroy the future of the nation, and give us a dollar back. whoop tee doo.
 
it will offset costs? That's not enough when it's also driving whole businesses overseas. you're saying they will destroy the future of the nation, and give us a dollar back. whoop tee doo.

Common sense dictates the economic impact will be significant to the negative for all those who are not invested to make money off the scheme. Chris has always just been a political shill of the left. The only way this chick would be against Cap and Trade is if it were a republican idea.
 
We don't call her "dumbkis" for nothing. I haven't come down on either side for cap-and-trade yet. No enough information. Yet ID thinks debunking a rumor automatically equates to supporting the issue.
 
If cap and trade has the intended effect, and it is not at all clear to me thatit will, of course it will affect everyone.

If it doesn't pinch your shoes a little it won't matter.

Funny how those that can afford 'pinches' don't give a thought to those who can't.
 
Back
Top