
by: Clyde Middleton posted: 2009-11-23 15:31:00
Viewed 301 times. 0 Comments.
Pretty remarkable - GDP reduces, displaced workers abound, and everyone's costs go up - except for poor folks ... we merely shift middle- and high-income monies to them.
The rest of this post is a few extracts from the report. My italics for emphasis. Entire report embedded at end.
The most damning first. Changes in Energy Use and Emissions:
The heavy use of offsets predicted by the models presumes that offsets could be provided with only modest administrative and other costs; if offsets proved not to be available at modest cost, allowance prices and the economic costs of the proposal would be much higher.
Gee, you mean all of this could be grossly understated? How comforting.
Macroeconomic impact:
On the basis of those estimates and its own analysis, CBO concluded that H.R. 2454 would slightly reduce real GDP—by roughly 0.25 percent to 0.75 percent in 2020 and by between 1.0 percent and 3.5 percent in 2050 (see the right panel of Figure 1). By way of comparison, CBO projects that real GDP will be roughly two-and-a-half times as large in 2050 as it is today. Losses in consumption and overall well-being would probably be smaller than losses in GDP.
Impact on employment:
Labor markets would take time to adjust to shifts in demand. Job losses would be concentrated in particular industries and in particular geographic regions. Some workers would probably end up working fewer hours or at lower wages than they did previously, and some might leave the labor force entirely. Involuntary job losses could significantly reduce the lifetime earnings of some affected workers.
The distribution of costs - redistribution to the "lowest quintile":
"CBO concluded that under H.R. 2454 the loss of aggregate purchasing power would increase from about 0.1 percent in 2012 to 0.8 percent in 2050. Those losses would be distributed in ways that tend to benefit lower-income households. In 2020, households in the highest income quintile would see a loss in purchasing power of 0.1 percent of after-tax income, and households in the middle quintile would experience a loss equivalent to 0.6 percent. Households in the lowest quintile, by contrast, would see an average gain of 0.7 percent. By 2050, households in the highest quintile would see a loss in purchasing power of 0.7 percent of after-tax income, and households in the middle quintile would see a loss of 1.1 percent. Those in the lowest quintile would see a 2.1 percent increase."
Full document:
Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/cbo-finally-synthesizes-financial-impact-of-waxman-markey-economically-horrid/trackback
Views: 87 Comments: 0
Views: 76 Comments: 0
House Republicans approved a conference-wide moratorium on earmarks on Thursday one day after a House committee enacted a ban on for-profit earmarks. The Republican's moratorium is more extensive than the House Appropriations Committee's ban in that it applies to all earmarks for all members of their caucus. "For millions of Americans, the earmark process in Congress has become a symbol of a broken Washington," they said. "We believe the time has come for House Republicans to adopt an immediate, unilateral moratorium on all earmarks."
Views: 52 Comments: 1
Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.That increase to 48% is fully 7 points higher than last year, which was also a record high.
Views: 80 Comments: 0
Views: 59 Comments: 0
Views: 82 Comments: 2
Views: 63 Comments: 1
Views: 53 Comments: 0
Views: 50 Comments: 0
Views: 36 Comments: 0
Comments 0
Have an opinion?