Dems Say: Tax You!

Plan Uses Taxes to Fight Climate Change
By H. JOSEF HEBERT
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 26, 2007; 7:34 PM

WASHINGTON — Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won’t like _ a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some home owners.

The fact remains however, that we have no need to “deal” with global warming. You can’t stop a natural process for which humanity has a less than 3% impact. But let’s not let facts get in the way of the “Global Warming Movement” (even though their view is more akin to a movement in the key of bowel).

“I’m trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it’s going to have a measure of pain that you’re not going to like,” Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

And Rep. Dingell, in serving for 52 years, knows a lot about inflicting pain on taxpayers.

Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that will craft climate legislation, is making it clear that he believes tackling global warming will require a lot more (OF YOUR MONEY) if it is to be taken seriously.

“This is going to cause pain,” he said, adding that he wants to make certain “the pain is shared in a way that is fair, proper, acceptable and accomplishes the basic purpose” of reducing greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.

What is it with this guy and causing pain? Any of you S&M folks seen him at a party? Got pictures? Well, next time you see him at the sex club, you might point out to him that nature is responsible for 97% of the greenhouse theory gases.

Dingell says he hasn’t ruled out a so-called “cap-and-trade” system, but that at least for now he wants to float what he believes is a better idea.

 And I guess we all know what floats. This could explain Dingell’s lengthy career.

 He will propose for discussion:

_A 50-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline and jet fuel, phased in over five years, on top of existing taxes.

_A tax on carbon, at $50 a ton, released from burning coal, petroleum or natural gas.

_Phaseout of the interest tax deduction on home mortgages for homes over 3,000 square feet. Owners would keep most of the deduction for homes at the lower end of the scale, but it would be eliminated entirely for homes of 4,200 feet or more.

Elimination and pain. This is one seriously twisted congressman. Or, could it just be that his colon is twisted due to his cranial rectal inversion? At age 81, Dingell should give serious thought to Metamucil.

 Do you think he has run this loss of interest tax deduction for homes of 4,200 or more past John Edwards and Al Gore? (They of multiple 4200+ homes.)

He says “it’s only fair” to tax those who buy large suburban houses and create urban sprawl. 

That’s only fair to him because he has lived long enough to pay off multiple 30yr. mortgages and doesn’t qualify for the interest deduction anymore. Besides, once he moves the rest of his stuff in at “the home” he can sell off those bad boy houses.

Some people (a reliable source to AP writers) immediately suggested he was offering proposals he knows won’t pass to sidestep other issues such as automobile fuel economy increases.

Granted, he is from Michigan. But, in case you haven’t noticed, carmakers are already responding to market pressure for more fuel efficient vehicles. Witness the growing availability of hybrids and bio-diesel vehicles. Of course, I don’t expect a democrat to know anyting about economics…or science.

Dingell rejects such criticism and said he wants to trigger “an intelligent discussion of the whole question.”

An intelligent discussion? In Congress?

 Many economists (Who are they exactly?) have long maintained that a carbon tax is a more-efficient, less-bureaucratic way (Obviously not Milton Freidman) to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide than a cap-and-trade system, which could be difficult to administer.

I just want to know how a tax is less bureacratic than anything. As for a cap-and-trade system it’s the easiest thing in the world to administer…. just buy more carbon credits from the Carbon Credit Warehouse and keep government out of the deal entirely.

Written on Thursday, September 27th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Filed under Carbon Credits, Global Warming, Politics.
Follow responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.