Boxer’s Carbon Tax Proposal Would Enrichen People Already Feeding From the Public Trough…

Democrat’s sashay forth with their latest non-strarter and basket full of government global warming lies.

Don’t they know the carbon trading markets have failed worldwide, wherever they have been tried. It’s such and old liberal idea, it has grown mold. And Spain has nearly bankrupted their contry with their “green energy” fiasco.

While the Guardian’s environmental amateur journo Suzanne Goldenberg bloviates about the horrible possibility that some climate skeptic think tanks may have actually gotten a drop in the bucket of funding compared to all the billions of taxpayer money poured down the climate research hole, we have a money and power grab move front and center by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Ca) and Bernie Sanders (I- VT).

The transparency of this move to funnel money to people within her sphere of influence on climate matters is clear to people in the know.

Here’s an article from the SFO chronicle that highlights her grab for cash:

Boxer’s push is a twist on carbon tax

Carolyn Lochhead

Washington — Sen. Barbara Boxer plans Thursday to co-sponsor a radical plan to control carbon dioxide emissions modeled on Alaska’s rebates of oil royalties to residents.

The California Democrat is a marquee draw for an otherwise obscure bill by Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont liberal and independent. Called “fee and dividend,” the legislation is an unusual variant on a carbon tax. It would impose a fee on carbon emissions at their source, such as coal mines, raising the price of fossil fuel energy.

But instead of giving the proceeds to the government, three-fifths of the money would be refunded to U.S. residents.

Such rebates could run into hundreds of dollars. The idea is modeled loosely on Alaska’s “permanent fund” that distributes royalties from the state’s oil and gas industry to every Alaskan resident.

Sounds great right? Stick it to those coal and oil companies so they can stick us with higher bills. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

But what about that other two-fifths of that carbon tax revenue?

$1.2 trillion

The tax would raise an estimated $1.2 trillion over a decade and reduce greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent from 2005 levels. Three-fifths of the tax would be rebated to “every legal U.S. resident,” which might make it more politically feasible than if it went to the government.

The rest of the money would go to incentives for clean energy and research.

A version of the “fee and dividend” idea is a favorite of NASA climate scientist James Hansen and climate activist Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.

Read more: 

Let’s see, two fifths of 1.2 trillion works out to be: 480 billion dollars. And over 10 years, that’s about 48 billion per year.

No wonder Hansen and McKibben like it. It will line the pockets of them and their friends for “research” far more so that they could ever imagine now.

But Guardian amateur journo Goldenberg is worried about that supposed “secret” funding of 120 million dollars for some think tanks from 2002 to 2010. Since she seems to want to look the other way, maybe she’s getting some of the money too.

If you want to know how much tax money has already been sent down this government’s scam hole …

climate-funding-us-govt-spending-web1

This merry go round and fantasy hoaxing has been spinning for the last 20+ years. The numbers on the chart needed to be added, as it does not accumulate. Overall we have spent on average of $5 billion a year on this government hoax.

This is what government does best, lie to people.

How would any of this reduce emissions? Like gun control, it is aimed at people control, what tyrants do best.

About these ads

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 135 other followers

%d bloggers like this: