Senators propose pollution ‘dividend' for Americans

[peejay 327]

Two senators propose pollution ‘dividend' for Americans

By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press

Dec. 12, 2009, 1:37AM

WASHINGTON — Two senators on Friday offered yet another approach to tackling climate change, proposing the government sell pollution allowances to industry to cut greenhouse gas emissions and then use most of the money to send tax-free monthly checks to every American.

The “dividend” checks, estimated to average about $100 a month over nearly two decades, would be aimed at offsetting the higher cost of energy.

The proposal by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was being offered as an alternative to a more complex cap-and-trade climate bill already before the Senate and approved by the House. Senators who believe Congress must address climate change are trying to cobble together a bill that has broad enough bipartisan support to get the 60 votes needed for it to pass, possibly early next year.

Cantwell said her approach is a simpler way to reduce carbon pollution and boost clean energy alternatives. Like the rival Senate bill, it would impose limits on greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, and is designed to cut emissions by 20 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century.

Republicans have opposed the climate legislation, authored by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that emerged in November from Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee. Many centrist Democrats also have said the bill needs to be overhauled.

Cantwell and Collins largely abandon the broad cap and trade approach that has been the focus in the Senate until now and which has been attacked by Republicans and some centrist Democrats as too complex, subject to manipulation and tantamount to imposing a huge energy tax and threatening jobs.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6766472.html

[slim 1,533]

So let me get this straight - every time someone in corporate America messes up, they send ME a check?

I love these women! They should be promoted.

[DEDixon 39]

i want a dividend (tax write-down) for not having any polluters (kids).

or maybe end the tax write-downs that parents get for children.... doubt anyone that wants kids (polluters) are doing it for the write-down anyway.

isn't the population part of the problem?

[slim 1,533]

Great points above!

[lostinblue 1,989]

After labor energy ranks second in cost of doing business for companies . Lets drive more companies overseas. It will put more companies out of business here. This little check wil really help when the unemployment check runs out.

[mawilson 2,133]

i want a dividend (tax write-down) for not having any polluters (kids).

or maybe end the tax write-downs that parents get for children.... doubt anyone that wants kids (polluters) are doing it for the write-down anyway.

isn't the population part of the problem?

Indeed - they got it backwards. Somehow it's people *with* kids who get more tax exemptions!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i want a dividend (tax write-down) for not having any polluters (kids).

or maybe end the tax write-downs that parents get for children.... doubt anyone that wants kids (polluters) are doing it for the write-down anyway.

isn't the population part of the problem?

Indeed - they got it backwards. Somehow it's people *with* kids who get more tax exemptions!

There was a time in the not too distant past where people understood that our children are our future.

These days it seems trendy in some circles to view children as pollution. Maybe the parents of those in these circles should have thought that way.

[SMR 368]

Two senators propose pollution ‘dividend' for Americans

By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press

Dec. 12, 2009, 1:37AM

WASHINGTON — Two senators on Friday offered yet another approach to tackling climate change, proposing the government sell pollution allowances to industry to cut greenhouse gas emissions and then use most of the money to send tax-free monthly checks to every American.

The “dividend” checks, estimated to average about $100 a month over nearly two decades, would be aimed at offsetting the higher cost of energy.

The proposal by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was being offered as an alternative to a more complex cap-and-trade climate bill already before the Senate and approved by the House. Senators who believe Congress must address climate change are trying to cobble together a bill that has broad enough bipartisan support to get the 60 votes needed for it to pass, possibly early next year.

Cantwell said her approach is a simpler way to reduce carbon pollution and boost clean energy alternatives. Like the rival Senate bill, it would impose limits on greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, and is designed to cut emissions by 20 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century.

Republicans have opposed the climate legislation, authored by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that emerged in November from Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee. Many centrist Democrats also have said the bill needs to be overhauled.

Cantwell and Collins largely abandon the broad cap and trade approach that has been the focus in the Senate until now and which has been attacked by Republicans and some centrist Democrats as too complex, subject to manipulation and tantamount to imposing a huge energy tax and threatening jobs.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6766472.html

This is a terrible idea that clearly shows that these senators don't understand economics and taxes. There is no such thing as a business tax. There are only taxes on consumers. Businesses either make a profit or stop doing business. If the government raises taxes on them, they will raise their prices. So the consumers will end up paying for the tax.

In short, you will get a check in the mail but it won't be enough to pay for your higher electric bills and higher prices on everything that that requires energy to produce, which is in fact everything. We'll just be sending money around in a circle with the government taking out a little overhead in each loop.

i want a dividend (tax write-down) for not having any polluters (kids).

or maybe end the tax write-downs that parents get for children.... doubt anyone that wants kids (polluters) are doing it for the write-down anyway.

isn't the population part of the problem?

Indeed - they got it backwards. Somehow it's people *with* kids who get more tax exemptions!

There was a time in the not too distant past where people understood that our children are our future.

These days it seems trendy in some circles to view children as pollution. Maybe the parents of those in these circles should have thought that way.

This is right no target. Trying to reduce a birthrates in a sure way to make your society take a nosedive.

[slim 1,533]

There was a time in the not too distant past where people understood that our children are our future.

These days it seems trendy in some circles to view children as pollution. Maybe the parents of those in these circles should have thought that way.

Just because Michael Jackson had a song about it, doesn't mean it's a good future.

Can we not agree that at least some children are pollution?

This is a terrible idea that clearly shows that these senators don't understand economics and taxes. There is no such thing as a business tax. There are only taxes on consumers. Businesses either make a profit or stop doing business.

Or the Senate bails them out and they continue to do business on our dime.

This is right no target. Trying to reduce a birthrates in a sure way to make your society take a nosedive.

So you're saying if we were to reduce the amount of kids on welfare and in public housing our society would implode?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There was a time in the not too distant past where people understood that our children are our future.

These days it seems trendy in some circles to view children as pollution. Maybe the parents of those in these circles should have thought that way.

Just because Michael Jackson had a song about it, doesn't mean it's a good future.

Can we not agree that at least some children are pollution?

Not really. Children are a product of their environment. We may agree that there are polluters - if that's the term you want to use - that shouldn't have children but you can't exactly blame the children for being born into whatever environment they are born into.

[slim 1,533]

Not really. Children are a product of their environment. We may agree that there are polluters - if that's the term you want to use - that shouldn't have children but you can't exactly blame the children for being born into whatever environment they are born into.

So we can't blame them once they become adults?

"Oh, so sorry. I didn't know you grew up in that environment. We're not going to hold you accountable for your own actions anymore because, after all, you grew up there and just don't know any better."

I know a guy that did some hard time for crack dealing. I asked him why he knew it was illegal yet did it anyway. His answer - "because that's what everyone did where I was from." Now, since you've lived in Cincinnati, I'll ask, why he, being from Cumminsville, was more apt to break the law than I was, being from Price Hill. Did we really grow up in such different environments? Sure, you can make the argument that it was different and maybe he was more involved in "that kind of lifestyle" but, why should that impact his decisions as an adult? He didn't get locked up til he was 27. That's more than enough time to make some good decisions for yourself, isn't it?

And if it's not... then what do we do about "those people?" I'm all for trying to give everyone a chance and helping everyone get on equal footing - for a while. I'm not at all for supporting an entire demographic of people AND ALL THEIR OFFSPRING for the rest of our lives.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Not really. Children are a product of their environment. We may agree that there are polluters - if that's the term you want to use - that shouldn't have children but you can't exactly blame the children for being born into whatever environment they are born into.

So we can't blame them once they become adults?

Where did I say that?

[Dan J 277]

Two senators propose pollution ‘dividend' for Americans

By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press

Dec. 12, 2009, 1:37AM

WASHINGTON — Two senators on Friday offered yet another approach to tackling climate change, proposing the government sell pollution allowances to industry to cut greenhouse gas emissions and then use most of the money to send tax-free monthly checks to every American.

The “dividend” checks, estimated to average about $100 a month over nearly two decades, would be aimed at offsetting the higher cost of energy.

The proposal by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was being offered as an alternative to a more complex cap-and-trade climate bill already before the Senate and approved by the House. Senators who believe Congress must address climate change are trying to cobble together a bill that has broad enough bipartisan support to get the 60 votes needed for it to pass, possibly early next year.

Cantwell said her approach is a simpler way to reduce carbon pollution and boost clean energy alternatives. Like the rival Senate bill, it would impose limits on greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, and is designed to cut emissions by 20 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century.

Republicans have opposed the climate legislation, authored by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that emerged in November from Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee. Many centrist Democrats also have said the bill needs to be overhauled.

Cantwell and Collins largely abandon the broad cap and trade approach that has been the focus in the Senate until now and which has been attacked by Republicans and some centrist Democrats as too complex, subject to manipulation and tantamount to imposing a huge energy tax and threatening jobs.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6766472.html

This is a terrible idea that clearly shows that these senators don't understand economics and taxes. There is no such thing as a business tax. There are only taxes on consumers. Businesses either make a profit or stop doing business. If the government raises taxes on them, they will raise their prices. So the consumers will end up paying for the tax.

In short, you will get a check in the mail but it won't be enough to pay for your higher electric bills and higher prices on everything that that requires energy to produce, which is in fact everything. We'll just be sending money around in a circle with the government taking out a little overhead in each loop.

i want a dividend (tax write-down) for not having any polluters (kids).

or maybe end the tax write-downs that parents get for children.... doubt anyone that wants kids (polluters) are doing it for the write-down anyway.

isn't the population part of the problem?

Indeed - they got it backwards. Somehow it's people *with* kids who get more tax exemptions!

There was a time in the not too distant past where people understood that our children are our future.

These days it seems trendy in some circles to view children as pollution. Maybe the parents of those in these circles should have thought that way.

This is right no target. Trying to reduce a birthrates in a sure way to make your society take a nosedive.

We can definitely have a birthrate that is sustainable, but its not something that can be forced. The two biggest indirect factors to reducing family size is economics and education.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

There was a time when CO2 was plant food, not pollution. Ahhh the good-ole days.

[Dan J 277]

There was a time when CO2 was plant food, not pollution. Ahhh the good-ole days.

It still is, but plants can only handle so much CO2, especially when we keep cutting it down.