Obama-Carbon Tax Coming in Jan...

[bk1983]

The losses come out of the taxpayers pocket.

OK, so do prices alter consumption or not?

 

[dilloduck]

OK, so do prices alter consumption or not?

It depends on how necessary the commodity is to sustain a family. Many spent LESS on other items so they could continue to pay for gas--no matter how high it went.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You just argued that there will be no change in economic behavior therefore there would be no reason to cut workforces nor any impact on the motivation for green technologies.

You really need to pick your position and quit flip flopping. It makes your arguments very confusing...

Excuse me but I said that a carbon tax would not result in less use of carbon producing fuel. I never said anything about economic behavior. that's your line.

Increasing taxes while expecting companies at the same time to invest in new and expensive technologies will result in following:

The costs of taxes AND capital improvements will be passed on to consumers resulting in the maximum price increases that the market will bear AND any cost increases to business that can't be passed on to the consumer will result in reduction of labor forces, less expansion and less R&D into new technologies and capital improvements.

Maybe you wouldn't get confused if you didn't attribute your argument to me and then say I contradict myself.

 

[bk1983]

How much did the price of gas alter consumption ? Not very much. Why--we HAVE to buy it.

You are wrong, price of gas went up and consumption went down.

So far, though, the worsening economy appears to be an even stronger curb on driving as consumers hunker down and businesses contract. The U.S. Energy Information Administration expects full-year gasoline demand to fall 3% this year, which would mark the sharpest annual decline since 1980. And though gasoline prices continue to sink, forecasters expect demand to fall again next year.
Even those who can afford to drive more are holding back over fears of a prolonged recession, or the possibility that prices will ricochet upward again

Gas Prices Spiral Down to Near $2 - WSJ.com

 

[dilloduck]

You are wrong, price of gas went up and consumption went down.



Gas Prices Spiral Down to Near $2 - WSJ.com

not NEARLY enough to make a dent. Gas prices didn't plummet 50% due to decrease in demand.

 

[PeterS]

How much did the price of gas alter consumption ? Not very much. Why--we HAVE to buy it.

We are driving nearly 10 billion miles less per month for a net swing in the YoY rate of growth in consumption by almost 10%. This is the single largest decline in consumption since the mid-80's when consumption declined by almost 40%...and where, again, we saw a direct response to the peak in oil prices.

It is lunacy to argue that price will not effect economic behavior when clearly it does...

 

[bk1983]

not NEARLY enough to make a dent. Gas prices didn't plummet 50% due to decrease in demand.

The sharpest decline in 28 years is not a "dent"?

Sorry but you are wrong again, you need to understand the issues you talk about. Lack of consumption or demand is exactly what caused the price to deflate.

 

[bk1983]

not NEARLY enough to make a dent. Gas prices didn't plummet 50% due to decrease in demand.

Here are the facts for you to ignore.

Expensive fuel and a weakening economy cut into demand for oil beginning in mid-July, sending the price of oil - and petroleum products like gasoline - into a tailspin.

Gas prices fall below $2 - Nov. 21, 2008

 

[dilloduck]

The sharpest decline in 28 years is not a "dent"?

Sorry but you are wrong again, you need to understand the issues you talk about. Lack of consumption or demand is exactly what caused the price to deflate.

Speculators---think speculators. Do you think it was a damn coincidence that the market crashed and oil dropped at the same time ?

 

[xsited1]

...The beat goes on...


Will Business Learn to Love the Carbon Tax? <I>Is it redistribution of wealth?</I>

"...Consistent with promises made during the campaign, and motivated by the need for revenue, the Obama transition team has made enactment of a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions a top priority..."

You've gotta love these sin taxes from the Elitists in power. Of course, all taxes will eventually harm the consumer and therefore the average middle-class taxpayer. Thank you, Obama, for sticking it to the man!

 

[Skull Pilot]

I am baffled by people's inability to see that every tax dollar taken by the government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the public.

When less money is available for people and businesses to spend and invest, business growth slows down and people have less money not more.

How on earth can anyone say higher taxes result in more growth and prosperity?

 

[WillowTree]

I am baffled by people's inability to see that every tax dollar taken by the government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the public.

When less money is available for people and businesses to spend and invest, business growth slows down and people have less money not more.

How on earth can anyone say higher taxes result in more growth and prosperity?

it's dark in there!

 

[PeterS]

Excuse me but I said that a carbon tax would not result in less use of carbon producing fuel. I never said anything about economic behavior. that's your line.

Increasing taxes while expecting companies at the same time to invest in new and expensive technologies will result in following:

The costs of taxes AND capital improvements will be passed on to consumers resulting in the maximum price increases that the market will bear AND any cost increases to business that can't be passed on to the consumer will result in reduction of labor forces, less expansion and less R&D into new technologies and capital improvements.

Maybe you wouldn't get confused if you didn't attribute your argument to me and then say I contradict myself.

Economic behavior dictates the amount of carbon based fuels produced and used. Production is based on consumption therefore if a tax will not alter consumption it will not alter production and therefore economic behavior. The position you are arguing is false...and purely nonsense.

And if you are having trouble following--a company that sells the same amount of goods and services at the same YoY rate after a price increase as before a price increase see the sames amount of capitalization from profits therefore has no reason to change it's behavior. Why on earth would you lay someone off or invest less when your growth curve is unaltered?

 

[editec]

I am baffled by people's inability to see that every tax dollar taken by the government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the public.

When less money is available for people and businesses to spend and invest, business growth slows down and people have less money not more.

How on earth can anyone say higher taxes result in more growth and prosperity?

It truly depends on what the government spends those dollars on.

If they spend them on investments which ultimately lead to more productivity, then those dollars invested do have a positive impact.

If they piss them away on things like making Halliburton wealthy, then they are TRULY detrimental to the economy as a whole.

I am baffled by your inability to see that.

 

[bk1983]

Speculators---think speculators. Do you think it was a damn coincidence that the market crashed and oil dropped at the same time ?

This is straight from the EIA, the facts whether you like it or not are that decreased energy demand led to the deflation in prices.

The decrease in global energy demand resulted in rapid and substantial reduction in crude oil and other energy prices. As a result, projections for both energy demand and prices are considerably lower than last month’s

 

[dilloduck]

I am baffled by people's inability to see that every tax dollar taken by the government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the public.

When less money is available for people and businesses to spend and invest, business growth slows down and people have less money not more.

How on earth can anyone say higher taxes result in more growth and prosperity?

Agreed--that carbon tax is coming out of the consumer's pocket--period.

 

[PeterS]

I am baffled by people's inability to see that every tax dollar taken by the government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the public.

When less money is available for people and businesses to spend and invest, business growth slows down and people have less money not more.

How on earth can anyone say higher taxes result in more growth and prosperity?

So now you are arguing that taxes remove capital from circular flow? Government is not zero sum and is part of circular flow. Transferring capital from the private sector to public sector will only reduce the economy if the capital is not used. Use of capital is not a problem with government...

 

[dilloduck]

So now you are arguing that taxes remove capital from circular flow? Government is not zero sum and is part of circular flow. Transferring capital from the private sector to public sector will only reduce the economy if the capital is not used. Use of capital is not a problem with government...

not it's not----the ABUSE of it certainly is tho.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Economic behavior dictates the amount of carbon based fuels produced and used. Production is based on consumption therefore if a tax will not alter consumption it will not alter production and therefore economic behavior. The position you are arguing is false...and purely nonsense.

And at what point does passing along tax increases and capital improvements and R&D result in diminishing returns? Look around and you tell me how many companies that this tax will affect are producing more than last year. production and revenue are already down but you say an additional tax will hav e a flat affect on profits.

The key phrase is "prices will be increased to the maximum the market will bear". Right now and for most likely the next couple years, the market won't be bearing much in the way of increases will it? Even if a comapny could keep revenue flat, raising operating expenses via taxes in a market that will not bear price increases will result in necessary cuts in labor and capital investments.

When the market can't bear the increases what will happen when taxes raise the operating costs of a business?

And if you are having trouble following--a company that sells the same amount of goods and services at the same YoY rate after a price increase as before a price increase see the sames amount of capitalization from profits therefore has no reason to change it's behavior. Why on earth would you lay someone off or invest less when your growth curve is unaltered?

You seem to be having trouble seeing that we are in a recession and probably will be for the next couple of years and that raising taxes now will do nothing but slow the recovery even more because there is no market to bear increased production costs.

But you get it right?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So now you are arguing that taxes remove capital from circular flow? Government is not zero sum and is part of circular flow. Transferring capital from the private sector to public sector will only reduce the economy if the capital is not used. Use of capital is not a problem with government...

No government is not zero sum, government is always a losing bet.

Government taxes you X and something much less than X actually goes to the proposed project or public works scam that is supposed to create jobs.

If that amount X was left in private hands ALL of it would find its way into the economy not just some fraction of it.