The $1500 in direct costs are passed on to consumers, because the government took in revenue from CO2 intensive industries, correct? And most of that money will go back into consumers pockets, through direct rebates or lowering other taxes. So won’t that money also “ripple through the economy, hitting consumer’s pockets again and again?
In the end, it should mostly balance out. The money taken from energy companies will go back into the economy, either directly, through lowered taxes, or after being spent on research into alternative energies. Once the scales are balanced, there’s very little change other than stronger incentives for energy efficiency.
It’s positively brilliant. So of course Heritage would be against it.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
The $4300 energy tax: my response
In case Herigate declines to publish my comment:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment