
by: Clyde Middleton posted: 2009-11-23 15:31:00
Viewed 306 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
Ranking Republican Paul Ryan responds to an NRO query about the news this morning: “The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that there is currently no official cost estimate. Yet House Democrats are touting to the press — and spinning for partisan gain — numbers that have not been released and are impossible to confirm.Boy, a final official number that came in over a trillion bucks would really bite them in the a**.
Views: 54 Comments: 0
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Arizona GOP Primary voters shows McCain ahead 48% to 41%. Three percent (3%) favor another candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. Following the announcement that Sarah Palin would campaign for his reelection, McCain opened up a 53% to 31% lead over Hayworth in January. The two men were in a near tie in November.By my math, McCain's lead shrunk from 21 to 7 in two months. Hmmm.
Views: 45 Comments: 0
Views: 57 Comments: 0
[House] leaders are mulling a rule that would allow the chamber to "deem" the Senate's version of health legislation as passed, without actually having to vote on it. Imagine how useful this trick would be in daily life. You could make unpopular decisions without actually appearing to make them. That excruciating Thanksgiving dinner at your brother-in-law's? You "deemed" that you attended. . . . It's understandable that some House Democrats wouldn't want to cast a direct vote on the Senate bill . . . before moving to change it. But a procedure this transparently gimmicky just adds to the cynicism surrounding the bill and opens it up to unnecessary court challenges.
Views: 58 Comments: 0
Views: 64 Comments: 1
In hypothetical match ups with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) in the general election, Campbell leads Boxer, 44% to 43%, while Boxer leads Fiorina, 45% to 44%, and tops DeVore, 45% to 41%. Both findings are within the survey's margin of error.
Views: 73 Comments: 0
The looming Congressional showdown over health care reform has set Washington’s legal war rooms whirring in preparation for court battles over any health legislation that moves towards President Barack Obama’s desk. Republican lawyers say they’re conducting research and drafting arguments for lawsuits that could be filed within days or weeks, particularly if House leaders decide to go forward with a “deem & pass” rule that would not permit a freestanding vote on the Senate-passed health care reform bill.
Views: 43 Comments: 0
Democrats might like to think that health care reform is all but a done deal if it clears the House, but the Senate is where Republicans have been plotting for months to sentence it to a painful procedural death. Republican aides have been mining the Senate’s arcane parliamentary rules for an attack that aims at striking elements both broad and narrow from the bill, weakening the measure and ultimately defeating it. Their goal is to force changes that leave Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) without 51 votes to pass it, or at the very least, that drive it back to the House for a second vote that drags out the process and saps Democratic resolve.
Views: 67 Comments: 0
Views: 71 Comments: 0
Views: 119 Comments: 4
Comments 0
Have an opinion?