Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
Bullshit. The memo addresses the bill which congress voted on. If they are saying the bill is deficit neutral, then they HAVE to get the $200B from somewhere, so it's fair game to use it in my example.
I know exactly how cap and trade works. You imply that a company will absorb the costs out of the goodness of their hearts and not pass it on to their customers as a way to ridiculously counter that this bill isn't going to mean significantly less money in MY pocket. Who are these mythical people that will pay it, if not us? When coal electric plants pay 90% more taxes, you think they are just going to eat that price as the "cost of doing business"? When they build the nuclear plant to replace the coal plant, do you think it's going to be paid for through the American exports to the Chinese or French consumer? Ridiculous.
I know you are not naive, so one can only assume you are deliberately being dishonest in your support of the bill. Spend, spend, spend. It's always someone else's money.
Tying this all back up, my original assertion was that people would vote for a governor who was going to give them some of their state taxes back, since they believe they are going to pay (in my opinion) the equivalent of 20% more to the feds soon enough. Whether I pay my electric company so they can pay the feds doesn't change the fact that I paid it to the feds. I still have $175 to $1761 less dollars in my pocket and we are absolutely no closer to solving this global warming hoax than we were before they made it up in order to grow government and control the people.
|
Which reality do you live on?
You do know that cap and trade hasn't been voted on yet, right?
That what they had was a budget proposal that included some sort of cap and trade as generating revenue in the future. And that no one has ever claimed that it would be "deficit neutral" because it was never supposed to be.
And I never said that the companies would not pass the cost on to the consumer, but how much of it they would pass on to the American consumer (as opposed to foreign consumers, and as opposed to how much they would rather invest in alternative technology) is not a simple matter of dividing the proposed revenue by the number of tax payers.
And if I am being dishonest, prove it, back it up with something more than the bullshit you have been spewing so far. By your own admissions your 20% number was bullshit. And to reach your "15%" number, you had to get a non technical internal memo, choose the higher number of a range given and in a completely nonsensical manner divide it by the number of taxpayers, ignoring completely that the economy doesn't work like that. And then you completely ignore the technical report that actually looks at the dynamics of how it works. And even then you are just wrong. If it generates 200billion a year, current federal tax revenue is a bit over 2 trillion. You do the math.
And I never said anything about supporting cap and trade in its current form, I merely pointed out how much bullshit you are saying about its costs.