e-commentary

. . .

C1         “The ‘Manhattan Project’ wisely collected all the talent in one location under one command to develop the atomic bomb.  The project required the right mathematical formulas and the right raw materials to be assembled by one team under one governmental authority.  Some say the solution to our energy challenges is to create a Manhattan Project under one authority with one energy czar.  However, the solution is not to establish a government agency but rather to enlist and unfetter the market mechanism.  Rather than subsidizing a company that is politically connected or sports a flashy marketing campaign, let the market decide.  Let not one but one million citizens work on it.  The proposed ‘carbon tax’ provides a tax on carbon and thus rewards those who can reduce or avoid the production of carbon and taxes those who cannot.  The funds collected by the tax are returned as a dividend to the public to maintain revenue neutrality.”

C2         “The ‘old cap and trade scheme’ created undesirable property rights that would be unworkable and undesirable.  A carbon tax and dividend sounds workable and desirable.”

C1          “Friedrich van Hayek would have endorsed the carbon tax and dividend mechanism.  He surely is rolling over in his grave because we as a society have not adopted it.”

C2         “I know that I for one want Fred to rest in peace.”

. . .

[See the website http://www.citizensclimatelobby.org/.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

A planet is a terrible thing to waste

Sign outside the Supreme Court:  “Supremes:  You can hurry love.”

This entry was posted on March 25, 2013 at 3:38 pm and is filed under Awards / Incentives, Economics, Economics Nobel, Gay Politics, Global Climate Change, Global Warming, Supreme Court, Taxation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.