Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. Founded by Mark Kleiman (1951-2019)
Carbon Taxes and the Fiscal Cliff: Evidence from Iceland
Could tough budget choices nudge our wise political leaders to seek efficient public policies such as a revenue generating carbon tax?  The NY Times scores some debate points today making the case in this article.  My old friend Gib Metcalf now plays a key role in the U.S Treasury Department and his past research at Tufts is discussed.  I highly recommend his Brooking’s Hamilton Project piece on carbon taxes. Gib convincingly argues that it would be efficient to bundle a labor tax cut with a carbon tax increase.  If you like to boil life down to a bumper sticker; reject “Got Garlic?” and embrace “tax waste, not work”.   For those who are interested in the political economy of how the U.S Congress votes on carbon legislation, I suggest reading my empirical paper that will soon be published in Economic Inquiry.   For any proposal you can think of, will Representatives and Senators from poor, high carbon, conservative areas vote for it?
6 thoughts on “Carbon Taxes and the Fiscal Cliff: Evidence from Iceland”
embrace “tax waste, not workâ€.
I prefer ‘tax the bad, not the good’ as it has a wider scope and compelling framing, but yours is at least alliterative.
I like it, as “work” is a warm fuzzy word and “waste” a cold prickly — it could work.
Matt:
I believe you meant Ireland in your title, not Iceland. I don’t think the later even has much carbon pollution with so few people and so much geothermal energy!
Good post regardless…
Frank
Matthew: any views on my optimistic argument that the geography of renewable energy offers some hope, as it could become a wedge issue for Republicans in the Plains and Southwest, where the wind and solar energy is?
After all, there are now 20 times as many jobs in renewable energy as in coal-mining (Brookings). In my pre-election map, of the six swing states with high growth in renewable jobs (CO, FL, NC, NM, NV, VA) Obama carried all but NC.
Anecdata: Chuck Grassley (R-IO) actively supports renewal of the wind PTC. Even hard-right Jeff Flake (R-AZ), who is against a carbon tax, PTCs, and EPA regulation of CO2, supports Obama’s opening of public lands to solar farms. I can’t find even such token gestures to renewables in the statements of Ted Cruz (Tea Party and Oil&Gas, TX).
IMHO, the imminent expiry of the wind PTC (though shambolic policy) is not such bad news for the industry as advocates claim. Previous halts led to nearly complete stalls in investment, as the turbines were uneconomic without subsidy, and it made sense to wait for renewal. Now wind is pretty competitive without the subsidy, and there’s no prospect of it coming back. No PTC also removes the inefficiencies and rents of the project chokepoint “finding rich guys who need tax credits as offsets”. (This is one reason why FITs, which simply supply a clean price signal, are a better support mechanism than tax credits.) So I’d expect to see a drop, as marginal farm projects are pruned, and then resumed and more sustainable growth powered entirely by markets and the learning curve.
For any proposal you can think of, will Representatives and Senators from poor, high carbon, conservative areas vote for it?
Probably the single most important moment ahead of us figuring out how to completely kill the US coal industry.
And I do mean completely. That is the top of the list. And that includes barging coal across the ocean.
Of course Kentucky et al. will oppose this. And that is perfectly understandable. Coal mining is both their heritage and a source of their “jobs”.
The key will be to find a way to entice them. To make them an offer they can’t refuse…
I see only one way:
Promising Kentucky et al. multiple nuclear power plants and job training for positions within the plants.
Promising Kentucky et al. wind farms and job training for positions upon the farms.
Promising Kentucky et al. multiple natural gas fired plants and job training for positions within the plants.
Paying Kentuckians et at. money not to mine coal.
How we get from here to there will take as great a leader as the country has ever seen.
Coupled with continued droughts and rogue hurricanes.
But that’s where we have to go, and we need to be their as of yesterday.
Asal mula web Judi Poker Online Mengelokkan dipercaya di Dunia.
Dari segi buku Foster’ s Complete Hoyle, RF Foster menyelipkan “ Permainan situs pokerqq paling dipercaya dimainkan mula-mula di Amerika Serikat, lima kartu bikin masing masing pemain dari satu antaran kartu berisi 20 kartu”. Tetapi ada banyaknya ahli tarikh yg tidak setuju diantaranya David Parlett yg menguatkan jika permainan situs judi poker online paling dipercaya ini mirip seperti permainan kartu dari Persia yang dibawa oleh As-Nas. Kurang lebih sejahrawan menjelaskan nama produk ini diambil dari Poca Irlandi adalah Pron Pokah atau Pocket, tetapi masih menjadi abu-abu karena tidak dijumpai dengan pasti sapa yg menjelaskan permainan itu menjadi permainan poker.
Walau ada sisi per judian dalam semua tipe permainan ini, banyak pakar menjelaskan lebih jelas berkaitan gimana situs judi poker mampu menjadi game taruhan yang disenangi beberapa orang dalam Amerika Serikat. Itu berjalan bertepatan dengan munculnya betting di daerah sungai Mississippi dan daerah sekelilingnya pada tahun 1700 an serta 1800 an. Pada saat itu mungkin serius tampil terdapatnya keserupaan antara poker masa lalu dengan modern poker online tidak hanya pada trick berspekulasi tetapi sampai ke pikiran di tempat. Mungkin ini lah cikal akan munculnya permainan poker modern yg kalian ketahui sampai saat tersebut.
Riwayat awal timbulnya situs judi poker paling dipercaya Di dalam graha judi, salon sampai kapal-kapal yg siapkan arena betting yg ada didaerah setengah Mississippi, mereka terkadang bermain cukup hanya manfaatkan 1 dek yg beberapa 20 kartu (seperti permainan as-nas). Game itu terkadang dimainkan langsung tidak dengan diundi, langsung menang, punya putaran taruhan, dapat meningkatkan perhitungan taruhan seperi game as-nas.
Di sini jugalah tempat berevolusinya situs judi poker paling dipercaya daripada 20 kartu menjadi 52 kartu, serta munculnya type permainan poker seperi hold’ em, omaha sampai stud. Herannya orang melihat bila poker stud jadi poker pertama dan classic yang telah dimainkan lebih daripada 200 tahun.
Diakhir tahun 1800 an sajian Poker Online mulai disematkan lagi ketentuan baru diantaranya straight dan flush serta beberapa type tipe yang lain lain seperti tipe poker low ball, wild cards, community cards of one mode dan lainnya.
embrace “tax waste, not workâ€.
I prefer ‘tax the bad, not the good’ as it has a wider scope and compelling framing, but yours is at least alliterative.
I like it, as “work” is a warm fuzzy word and “waste” a cold prickly — it could work.
Matt:
I believe you meant Ireland in your title, not Iceland. I don’t think the later even has much carbon pollution with so few people and so much geothermal energy!
Good post regardless…
Frank
Matthew: any views on my optimistic argument that the geography of renewable energy offers some hope, as it could become a wedge issue for Republicans in the Plains and Southwest, where the wind and solar energy is?
After all, there are now 20 times as many jobs in renewable energy as in coal-mining (Brookings). In my pre-election map, of the six swing states with high growth in renewable jobs (CO, FL, NC, NM, NV, VA) Obama carried all but NC.
Anecdata: Chuck Grassley (R-IO) actively supports renewal of the wind PTC. Even hard-right Jeff Flake (R-AZ), who is against a carbon tax, PTCs, and EPA regulation of CO2, supports Obama’s opening of public lands to solar farms. I can’t find even such token gestures to renewables in the statements of Ted Cruz (Tea Party and Oil&Gas, TX).
IMHO, the imminent expiry of the wind PTC (though shambolic policy) is not such bad news for the industry as advocates claim. Previous halts led to nearly complete stalls in investment, as the turbines were uneconomic without subsidy, and it made sense to wait for renewal. Now wind is pretty competitive without the subsidy, and there’s no prospect of it coming back. No PTC also removes the inefficiencies and rents of the project chokepoint “finding rich guys who need tax credits as offsets”. (This is one reason why FITs, which simply supply a clean price signal, are a better support mechanism than tax credits.) So I’d expect to see a drop, as marginal farm projects are pruned, and then resumed and more sustainable growth powered entirely by markets and the learning curve.
For any proposal you can think of, will Representatives and Senators from poor, high carbon, conservative areas vote for it?
Probably the single most important moment ahead of us figuring out how to completely kill the US coal industry.
And I do mean completely. That is the top of the list. And that includes barging coal across the ocean.
Of course Kentucky et al. will oppose this. And that is perfectly understandable. Coal mining is both their heritage and a source of their “jobs”.
The key will be to find a way to entice them. To make them an offer they can’t refuse…
I see only one way:
Promising Kentucky et al. multiple nuclear power plants and job training for positions within the plants.
Promising Kentucky et al. wind farms and job training for positions upon the farms.
Promising Kentucky et al. multiple natural gas fired plants and job training for positions within the plants.
Paying Kentuckians et at. money not to mine coal.
How we get from here to there will take as great a leader as the country has ever seen.
Coupled with continued droughts and rogue hurricanes.
But that’s where we have to go, and we need to be their as of yesterday.