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
|Holder will regret his refusal to obey the Constitution|
|'Flood Wall Street' climate protesters take aim at their corporate allies|
|3 opportunities for better US-India defense ties|
|Is Nicolás Maduro Latin America's new man at the United Nations?|
We welcome you to join us as Brown shares her perspective on the role of the courts in seeking educational justice and advocating for continued reform.
AEI welcomes you to this Philanthropic Freedom Project event, in which Novogratz will describe her work investing in early-stage enterprises, what she has learned at the helm of Acumen, and the role entrepreneurship can play in the fight against global poverty.