To the Editor:
Robert H. Frank’s call for a carbon tax is deeply misguided. By raising energy costs, carbon taxes would be economically stultifying, and deeply regressive. They would render the United States less competitive on world markets and ultimately trigger industry and capital flight.
For all that pain, there would be no gain. With China and India set to dominate global greenhouse gas emissions for a century, unilateral action by the United States would have virtually no impact on the trajectory of global average temperatures. And it would be unilateral: there is no prospect for global greenhouse gas controls anytime soon. Besides, as the International Energy Agency points out, United States carbon dioxide emissions have already fallen by 430 million metric tons (7.7 percent) since 2006, “the largest reduction of all countries or regions.”
Let’s be honest: a carbon tax is simply another tax that advocates believe would be more palatable to the public because it’s painted green.
Kenneth P. Green
Washington, Aug. 29
The writer is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
To the Editor:
What's new on AEI
|Making Ryan's tax plan smarter|
|The teacher evaluation confronts the future|
|How to reform the US immigration system|
We invite you to join us for two panel discussions on how Augustus created order from chaos 2,000 years ago, and what makes for durable domestic and international political systems in the 21st century.
Please join us for a book launch event and panel discussion about how a marketplace of education options can help today's students succeed in tomorrow's economy. Attendees will receive a complimentary copy of the featured book.
Please join us for a luncheon event in which our panel will discuss what conservatives can learn from how liberals talk and think about the safety net and where free-market economics, federalism, and social responsibility intersect to lift people out of poverty.