This is more of the “social cost of carbon” nonsense. The enviros now want folks to believe that not taxing carbon amounts to a fossil fuel subsidy. The social cost of carbon is an entirely fictional (and bogus) concept. In reality, fossil fuels have provided countless trillions of dollars of societal benefits.
Mr. Obama has destroyed $3,000,000,000,000 of wealth. $200,000 of it was mine.
“The implication is that government IS society. ” Your whole comment is good (as usual) but this is a critical point. Government is a component of society rather than being the society. So many things that are society’s business but not government’s business!
The “social cost” of the Obama presidency could be taken as the loss of wages and revenues when comparing (an arbitrary) 6% unemployment since (an arbitrary) January 2010 to the revenues from 8-10% unemployment in the same time frame, plus the increased crime that usually follows unemployment, plus increased family stress resulting in divorce or family member abuse, plus…
And huge royalties they pay on what they extract.
Interesting: They ALWAYS ignore the comparable amount oil companies pay the government for ‘leases’ on oil-bearing lands – renting the *right* to drill for gas or oil from DOI but somehow never getting *permission* to do so from DOE.
And who defines how “to properly priced carbon”? God forbid allowing the free market to do it. And what about all those subsidies to tobacco, sugar, ethanol, etc.?
Then there’s the gratuitous and egregiously dishonest scary-pollution-that’s really-steam pic.
Not listening to Al Gore is a subsidy towards common sense.
Even if “carbon pollution” was a negative externality, negative externalities are not government subsidies
If ‘not taxing’ is a subsidy, why not go all the way? If you like big numbers, why not say ‘not confiscating all of it’ is a subsidy?
The libtards response to the libtards’ alleged “social cost” of fossil fuel is a tax. The implication is that government IS society. Paying the government money does not change any of the alleged problems caused by fossil fuels.
If they get away with this one, we should see a host of new taxes, like on anything Michelle doesn’t like.
I wonder what the social cost of the Obama presidency is? Trillions, no doubt.
I’ve come to realise over the years, that the ‘balance sheet’ used by the eco-mentalists is definitely all ‘plusses’ for their pet schemes and all ‘minuses’ for anything they don’t like.
Cheers.
NicG.