The "Cap-and-Trade" legislation he hopes to pass as soon as possible.
The George Marshall Institute studied the proposals as now outlined by House Democrats supporting Mr. Obama's agenda. Below are the taxes which would most likely result if this legislation comes to fruition.
Don't forget, this was one of the two candidates served up to the American people last election that held himself out as one who was concerned with the tax burdens now on the average "Joe the Plumber" Americans:
"The authors find that the constraints posed by the Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade approach is equivalent to a constant (in percentage terms) consumption decrease of about 1% each year, continuing to 2050. Put another way, the cap-and-trade approach is the equivalent of a permanent tax increase for the average American household, which was estimated to be $1,100 in 2008, would rise to $1,437 by 2015, to $1,979 in 2030, and $2,979 in 2050.
Reviewing a host of recent studies, Buckley and Mityakov show that estimates of job losses attributable to cap-and-trade range in the hundreds of thousands. The price for energy paid by the American consumer also will rise. The studies reviewed showed electricity prices jumping 5-15% by 2015, natural gas prices up 12-50% by 2015, and gasoline prices up 9-145% by 2015. As an illustration, gasoline would suffer a 16 cent price increase per gallon at the low end of the estimates to a $2.58 penalty at the high end (using the January 2009 reported retail price of $1.78 per gallon)."
So, again, as with the mortgage and financial crisis, we are not addressing the problems in a positive or meaningful way, simply either throwing money at the problems at the taxpayers expense, or passing the costs of corporate America's freewheeling ways on to the American public and socializing both the debts, and the "fines," in the way of new taxes on the public in general.
CNN and the mainstream media have been also promoting these measures for several weeks.
CNN is owned by General Electric, which would stand to gain enormous profits if such taxes were instituted both indirectly and directly.
These taxes would erase the recent reduction in the income tax rates for Americans making less than $250,000 per year.
It would also hit the average farmer in the Midwest, agricultural and mining communities the hardest. Rural America.
Why not simply give tax incentives and protections for those corporations that invest a portion of their profits in clean energy alternatives instead? Especially those investing in nuclear, wind and solar power.
These measures are so broad that farmers in the Midwest already under outrageous EPA particulate standards, now will also be slammed with fines and fees for greenhouse gases from their equipment in addition during both planting and harvesting time. It hamstrings our entire agricultural industry base in its provisions.
Only liberal Democrat-Globalists would find a way in order to actually tax now the air we breathe.
Maybe Mr. Obama, Ms. Clinton, Pelosi and Napolitano could start setting good examples by retiring Air Force One and cut their personal and business travel now in this high tech age of faxes, computers and satellite communications. Just how many trips are necessary in order to evaluate the Southwestern border issue?
Those steps would reduce the greenhouse gases emitted currently from Kansas, Iowa and Nebraska all combined.
http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=636
