The Clean Power Plan Is a Great Way to Make the Poor Poorer

[GURPS]

The Clean Power Plan Is a Great Way to Make the Poor Poorer


In the U.S., the federal government is embarking on a troubling regulatory path—one that will drive up energy costs for families and businesses, drive out employment opportunities, and have a minuscule impact, if any, on the global climate system.

Take the administration’s recently finalized Clean Power Plan. It will require drastic cuts in the carbon dioxide emissions of 47 states, and will shift America’s energy economy away from affordable, reliable energy to more expensive, politically preferred sources.

The higher costs will adversely impact poor minority families and seniors on fixed incomes the most, because transportation and residential energy costs represent a larger portion of their budget. Energy bills represent approximately one-fifth of low-income Americans’ budgets, disproportionately affecting black and Hispanic communities.

awesome ... I guess the FED will have to subsidies electric like the Internet for the poor, by additional fees on 'the rich'

 

[tommyjo]

Yet another awesome source, GRUPS.

Your author is an "economist" who works for The Heritage Foundation.

You rail about the "liberal bias of the MSM" and to combat that, instead of using a source with a pedigree in the science you pull out another political whore? How enlightened of you!

 

[limblips]

Yet another awesome source, GRUPS.

Your author is an "economist" who works for The Heritage Foundation.

You rail about the "liberal bias of the MSM" and to combat that, instead of using a source with a pedigree in the science you pull out another political whore? How enlightened of you!

Curious. Why would you feel an economist is not qualified to write about the economic impacts of EPA policies? He didn't write about science.

 

[glhs837]

From the WAPO article.......

"The administration itself says that the plan will 'save the average American family $85 annually on their energy bill by 2030.” It also says there will be immense public health benefits to cleaning the air, resulting in “an 88% decline in premature death.'"

Well, if those predictions work half as well as the damn Obamacare ones about how much less I was going to spending on frekin health care once he got his way, screw that. That $85 dollar savings will turn into a +$100 a month surcharge and the magical death savings will turn into "Well, we didn't understand that people were not really dying from this after all, so sorry".

 

[Gilligan]

Yet another awesome source, GRUPS.

Your author is an "economist" who works for The Heritage Foundation.

You rail about the "liberal bias of the MSM" and to combat that, instead of using a source with a pedigree in the science you pull out another political whore? How enlightened of you!

Pretty lame stuff there sugartits. Not one word or sentence that actually took issue with, or attempted to refute, the contents of the article.

 

[stgislander]

Curious. Why would you feel an economist is not qualified to write about the economic impacts of EPA policies? He didn't write about science.

Mr. Loris' Master's Degree is from George Mason which probably puts him in the "Austrian School" of economics. TJ puts that school of economic thought right up there with alchemy. Plus he spent some time working at the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.

 

[GURPS]

Pretty lame stuff there sugartits. Not one word or sentence that actually took issue with, or attempted to refute, the contents of the article.

does she ever :shrug:

 

[SamSpade]

Yet another awesome source, GRUPS.

Your author is an "economist" who works for The Heritage Foundation.

You rail about the "liberal bias of the MSM" and to combat that, instead of using a source with a pedigree in the science you pull out another political whore? How enlightened of you!

The discussion has virtually nothing to do with climate science and entirely to do with the economic impact the plan will have on the poor.

A climate scientist is exactly the kind of person who should NOT weigh in on the subject. You have a problem with his credentials as an economist?

 

[GURPS]

You have a problem with his credentials as an economist?

she has a problem with the Heritage Foundation