Though it was only by 7 votes, the cap and trade scheme has finally been approved.
Let’s look at the facts. Cap and Trade has not significantly reduced Carbon emissions in any country that it has been enacted in. It has never created more jobs than it has lost, and it has never amounted to more than a tax on a harmless gas. All the taxes assessed by Cap and Trade will inevitably be passes onto the consumer. Gas prices will skyrocket again, and the cost of virtually everything will increase.
Despite this fact, Barack Obama believes that this bill will actually create jobs. Says Obama, “This is a jobs bill”. According to CNN, Obama believes that this bill will actually create “millions of new jobs” [1]. Perhaps Obama needs a quick economics lesson: When the cost of everything increases and wages remain the same, aggregate demand is less, because consumers cannot afford to buy as much as before.
What Obama thinks though is that this bill will cause some sort of quick change to a cleaner United States, because as the costs of “dirty” products increase, the public is more likely to buy less “dirty” products. However, it is not that simple.
Those “dirty” products include gasoline, oil, natural gas, and coal. These products are currently the main contributors to the power grid in the United States. There is no true “green” alternative source of energy. Biofuels and biodiesels are not profitable without massive amounts of subsidies. Solar energyand Wind energy combined constitute less than half of 1 percent of energy production and are impractical to expand to even 5 percent. Hydroelectricity can not expand much more either, as there can only be so many dams on a river while maintaining high energy efficiency.
So, ultimately, this Cap and Trade Program is a massive energy tax. As energy costs increase for all americans in the face of a recession, how is the little guy that Obama was going to protect going to make his next house payment?
This bill has not yet passed the Senate, so there is still hope for the American economy.
[1] http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/26/house.energy/index.html