Mediaboss Marketing

Purist objections scuttled Washington States market-friendly carbon tax plan in November. Lets not let that happen at the national level.

Smoke rising from the Eggborough Power Station. (John Giles / PA Wire)

Carbon-tax haters can relax. The proposal for a national carbon tax released on February 8 by high-level Republicans, including ber-GOP consigliere James Baker, isnt going anywhere. Financially and ideologically, the American right is wedded to carbon fuels. Trumpism runs on and reeks of them. Predictably, not a single Republican in Congress, and no one in the White House, has uttered a single positive word about the new carbon-tax plan.

Nevertheless, the proposals intended audience may not be Beltway Republicans but rather those ordinary Americans, majorities in both parties, who say they want action on climate, and who therefore might yet figure in the political equation over climate policy. That group includes progressives. We should pay attention: Carbon taxes matter.

Our long-building climate crisis is already materializing as drowned coasts, punishing droughts, vanishing glaciersand political upheaval. At its root is a century-old lie: market prices for gasoline and other fossil fuels that do not factor in the damage from burning them.

A clean-energy revolution is at last underway, with wind power, solar electricity, and energy efficiency becoming not only cheaper by the day but also easier to deploy. Still, the clean-energy transition will be slowed until prices of coal, oil, and gas reflect their true environmental costs. A carbon tax could do that, if designed properly.

How carbon taxes work is simple enough, at least in theory. Fuel use is infinitely varied and intricately woven into society in ways that regulations such as auto-mileage standards cant fully reach. Clear price signals, on the other hand, can be a nearly magic wand to help billions of invisible hands rapidly reduce and replace fossil fuels.

But with a carbon tax come difficult choices about the vast revenue it will generate. Carbon taxing had a test run at the ballot box last November in the state of Washington, and it ended badly.

Progressives cant just walk away from carbon taxes, the policy tool with the best chance of catching fire globally.

On November 8, voters in the Evergreen State rejected by a nearly 3-to-2 margin what would have been the nations first statewide carbon tax. A win for Initiative 732 would have given the United States a carbon-tax beachhead, like Canadas British Columbia, which has had a small but successful carbon tax since 2008.

Remarkably, the decisive factor in defeating I-732 may not have been money from Big Carbon or even popular aversion to higher taxes, since the initiative was tailored to keep Washingtonians tax burden unchanged. What doomed I-732 was a fissure within the climate movement, with centrist economists and other policy wonks in favor of the initiative and progressive greens opposed.

Stated briefly, climate activists in Washington split over opposing answers to two key questions: What are carbon taxes for, and who gets to design them?

Carbon taxes can cut emissions in two ways. As noted above, they raise the price of carbon fuels, thereby worsening their competitive position vis--vis cleaner fuels. In addition, the tax revenues raised by a carbon tax can be invested in clean-energy infrastructure such as public transit and community solar.

The first paththe price pull of boosting market prices of carbon fuelsis what dazzles economists. The second routethe revenue push of investing in green infrastructureappeals to many ordinary folks, especially on the left. Some progressives actively distrust policies that lean hard on price signals, partly for fear that workers in dirty industries will be penalized as investment migrates to cleaner alternatives.

The stakes are higher now than ever. Get The Nation in your inbox.

For decades, reactionary forces in the United States have been able to block seemingly every new public endeavor by labeling it tax and spend. The Washington State carbon-tax proponents believed they had an antidote: Dont allow the government to spend the revenues from the carbon tax; rather, use those revenues to reduce other taxes. The political assumption seemed to be that going revenue neutral, though it might frustrate the leftbye-bye, public investmentcould placate the right or at least capture the center. And so Carbon WA, as the advocates of I-732 called themselves, fashioned its ballot initiative around cuts to the states regressive sales tax.

Progressive greens recoiled. The Alliance for Jobs and Clean Energy, a state umbrella group of environmental-justice organizations and mainstream allies, blasted I-732 for starving green jobs and ignoring front-line communities. So did nationally prominent progressive leaders like Naomi Klein and Van Jones. The measures electoral chances, which were never good, could not withstand this split. On Election Day, as Hillary Clinton was besting Trump in Washington State by half-a-million votes, the carbon tax was rejected, 59 percent to 41 percent.

But progressives cant just walk away from carbon taxes. Carbon taxes are the only policy tool that, by slashing demand in a rapid, predictable way, divests our economy from fossil fuels and enables governments, business, and consumers to make investments in the transition to clean energy. Carbon taxes also have the best chance of catching fire globally.

The carbon tax James Baker brought to the Trump White House on February 8 on behalf of the new Climate Leadership Council has a lot in common with I-732: The Councils proposal is also avowedly revenue neutral. But rather than lowering an existing tax, it relies on a so-called tax-and-dividend model: As the state of Alaska does with oil revenues, revenues from the Councils national carbon tax would be returned equally to all American households in quarterly dividends digitally deposited in Social Security accounts. The tax would start at $40 per ton of carbon dioxide.

Earmarking all of the revenue to these dividends creates the political will to raise the tax every year, since the dividends rise in tandem with the tax rate. Ramping up the tax by $5 a year would shrink the use of carbon fuels so drastically that, by my calculations, US carbon emissions in 2030 would be 40 percent less than they were in 2005 (a standard baseline year).

Government policy revolves around trade-offs, and on balance James Bakers carbon tax is worth supporting.

Yet this progress comes with a catch. The council would phase out much of the Environmental Protection Agencys regulatory authority over greenhouse gases and would outright repeal President Obamas Clean Power Plan to cut emissions from electricity generation. It would also immunize fossil-fuel companies from lawsuits for damages done by their productslawsuits such as those bound to arise from the revelations that ExxonMobil and other companies knew for decades about the climate damages their products cause, and lied about it.

But government policy revolves around trade-offs, and on balance the councils carbon tax is worth supporting. After all, well over 80 percent of the Clean Power Plans targeted reductions for 2030 were already achieved by the end of 2016. Thus trading away the Clean Power Plan for a tax that could scour fossil fuels from the entire economy is like swapping an aging ballplayer for the next superstar.

Of course, some people will not see it that way, particularly traditional green groups that helped write the laws and regulations that cleaned up the nations air and water. Some will regard the councils trade as a ploy to undo the EPAs authority to protect not just climatewhere it may be largely ineffectual anywaybut public health.

With Republicans tightly lashed to climate denial, the value of Bakers carbon-tax proposal may be less as a gateway to legislation and more as a spur for progressives and other citizens to take a clear look at carbon pricing.

Will progressives trust the verdict of economists that a revenue-neutral carbon tax can drive the energy transition so long as the tax level is high enough? Or do we support carbon taxes only if the revenues are invested in the clean-energy transition? If so, how do we craft a spending program that reconciles the claims of competing interests? And what is our blueprint for building political power to enact such a carbon tax, when tax remains a dirty word in national politics?

Clear majorities of Americans want climate action. Remarkably, some polls have even found that majorities of Americans support carbon taxes like the Climate Leadership Councils proposal. With the Democrats national defeats last November, the failure of climate activists to unite on the Washington state referendum is looking like an unforced error of cruel proportions. We cant afford to repeat that mistake at the national level.

See the original post:
Progressives Need to Get Over Themselves and Support This GOP-Backed Carbon-Tax Plan - The Nation.

Forbes

Coastal Progressives Score Lucrative Tax Deduction By Funding Bag Tax Lobbying Efforts Forbes Chocolates, jewelry, and flowers may be the last items many New Yorkers carry home in complimentary plastic shopping bags, as a new five-cent bag tax passed by the NYC City Council last year is scheduled to go into effect the day after Valentine's Day.

More:
Coastal Progressives Score Lucrative Tax Deduction By Funding Bag Tax Lobbying Efforts - Forbes

Many people who consider themselves progressive are stoked that Trumps National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, resigned as the result of charges surrounding his discussions with a Russian ambassador while Trump was President-elect.

Congressional Democrats want to use the Flynn story to go after Trump. As Representative Nancy Pelosi said: After Flynn resignation, FBI must accelerate its investigation of the Trump Administrations Russian connection. Even before Flynns resignation, Representative Maxine Waters did a segment on Democracy Now called Trump Should Be Impeached If He Colluded with Russians Ahead of Election.

There are certainly good reasons to want to see Flynn go. He recently put Iran on notice while the White House tried to gin up the case against Iran.

And there are obvious reasons to try to impeach Trumpsee his violations of the emoluments clause.

But its easier, more nationalistic and ultimately horrifying for so-called progressives and others with an alleged interest in peace to be harping on the Russian angle.

The Clinton campaign focused on Russia time and again during the presidential campaignwith disastrous results. Clinton talked about Russia and Trump talked about jobs in the rust belt. Guess who won the presidency?

Democrats are making common cause with the most war-mongering parts of the U.S. establishment. They buttress incredibly dubious notions of U.S. victimology and demonize official enemies that increase U.S. militarism and the likelihood for confrontation with another nation on the planet that could destroy the planet a hundred times over.

Democrats are making common cause with the most war-mongering parts of the U.S. establishment. They buttress dubious notions of U.S. victimology and increase U.S. militarism and the likelihood for confrontation with a nation on the planet that could destroy the planet a hundred times over.

Trump had just reportedly turned down Elliott Abramss bid to be number two at the State Department. That was a good thing. Elliott Abrams was part of the Iran-Contra scandal and needed a Christmas Eve pardon from George H.W. Bush. He backed death squads in Central America. He then did a stint in the George W. Bush administration in charge of democracy promotion and was almost certainly behind still unaccountable horrors by Israel and in Iraq and elsewhere.

But he somehow gets depicted as the voice of reason. In fact, just as the major media were closing in on Flynn, Elliott Abrams appeared on CNN, saying he thought Steve Bannon was behind him not getting the job. Damn that crazy Bannon for apparently blocking a certifiable war criminal.

Trump won the presidency in large part because he was a Republican who could (with minimal credibility) talk about being against the establishment. I didn't buy it, but lots of people did. He won an election that I doubt many in the vast Republican field could have. Trump talked about non-intervention, he talked about preserving Social Security and Medicare.

One upshot of the Flynn resignation is that Vice President Mike Pence, a white Christian nationalist, who is also is a darling of both Wall Street and the neo con interventionists comes out smelling like roses. Trump is a twisted narcissist and a political opportunist. But Pence is more dangerous.

Flynn was compelled to resign in large part because what is euphemistically called the intelligence community apparently had a recording of his dealings with Russian representatives that he allegedly mischaracterized.

This implies that people will be held accountable for falsehoods that upset the CIA or the NSA.

Its worth keeping in mind that when Trump seemed to challenge this part of the permanent government in January, leading Democrat Chuck Schumer said Trump was really dumb for attacking the intelligence agencies. Said Schumer: Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.

And what else did we just see happening as Flynn was resigning? Steven Mnuchin, from the good folks at Goldman Sachs was confirmed as Treasury Secretary. The case against Mnuchin is so massive and his Wall Street / Goldman Sachs / Soros / foreclosure king / Skull and Bones pedigree is so not populist that it's quite remarkable that he was able to get through.

Virtually all the Democrats in the Senate did vote against Mnuchin. But they all knew that that wouldnt stop him. Schumer got to put out some populist rhetoric, conveniently ignoring his own deep ties to Wall Street.

Four of Schumers top funders through his political career are in insurance and finance: Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Credit Suisse Group. Heck, he even took money from Mnuchin himself.

Wall Street and other corporate interests are quite firmly in control of the Democrats in Congress and Trump has put them in power in his cabinet. Part of the twisted dynamic now at work in Washington is that the populist / nationalist wing of the Trump administration would disappear if Trump were to make like Flynn, and disappear.

Trump is an obvious con artist and is not to be trusted. Id bet his attempts at a detente with Russia have to do with profiteeringor worse, with trying to go after China. But the criticism to date bares more resemblance to the Republican obsession with Benghazi than with an attempt to meaningfully try to change destructive U.S. policies around the world.

No meaningful critique of Trump can rely on demonizing the other major nuclear power, especially given the litany of examples of illegal U.S. aggression around the world, including such provocations of Russia as violating promises and expanding NATO to Russia's border. Putin makes U.S. allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia look like idyllic democratic wonderlands. That is to say, the United States has many unsavory allies.

If only liberals scrutinized Presidents when they want to go to war like they do Trump when he wants to make peace with Putin.

Go here to read the rest:
Progressives Need to Think Through Implications of Flynn's Resignation - Progressive.org

A fight club at Central Florida University in Orlando, Florida, has trained leftist students to physically fight conservatives and Republicans.

You read that right. In response to the record number of hate crimes against Latinos, Immigrants, Muslims, Women, the LGBTQIA+ community, Jews, African Americans and other minorities since the rise of Donald Trump and other Alt-Right Neo-Nazis, the Knightsof Socialism has decided to host a series of self-defense clinics for anyone that wants to learn how to BASH THE FASH, the event description on Facebook read, according to Campus Reform.

These are not exactly responsible sentiments that make parents sleep well at night.

An update for the Feb. 5 event invited female students because the Commander in thief [sic] is a sexual predator and rapist and they expect sexual assault to skyrocket over the next year.

During the event, local amateur fighter Adrian taught the group how to properly throw a jab and followed by giving everyone a chance to put on a pair of boxing gloves and test their skills, reported Knightnews.com, the universitys website for students. Participants enjoyed the experience and felt that they really learned something.

The event was called a public event on Facebook but the notice also said, This event is open to everyone and anyone, EXCEPT REPUBLICANS.

Parents, is this the environment you are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for and seriously, is your child safe at school?

Violence toward opposition thinking seems to be part of the new playbook on the Left. This is not a situation they will confirm, but neither are they denying it or calling it off, apparently.The silence on the part of liberal leaders toward these actions only seems to encourage it. The alarming leftist call to violence and hysteria is growing think Madonna threatening to bomb the White House during the Women's March, and Meryl Streep using the term "brownshirts," a Nazi-era term, in a recent speech and many conservatives are realizing it is necessary to prepare themselves against it.

The University of Central Florida (UCF), far from condemning the actions of these socialist students and their "fight club," barely raised an eyebrow. A spokeswoman for the school told Campus Reform that "they are aware of the event, do not encourage violence, and will be 'looking into' the event further," according to Campus Reform.

So it's just another day on an American college campus, the attitude seems to be but these are not exactly responsible, proactive sentiments that make parents sleep well at night. This trend should concern any family with high school seniors looking into higher education for the years ahead.

Two other events on college campuses are worth noting. At both the University of California, Berkeley and New York University campuses, conservative speakers were scheduled and many people lined up to attend. Protests turned violent with liberal students doing whatever they could to silence opposing political viewpoints.

Breitbart Editor Triggers Berkeley: Violence and Chaos Ensue

The violence shown to conservatism which is inarguably a minority ideology today on campuses nationwide has mostly involved simple assaults. Rest assured: If unchecked, major bodily injuries or even worse will occur, as aggressors get bolder. The audacity of these rioters may be encouraged by a few factors:

Anonymity: Allowing masked protesters only emboldens them to act contrary to their normal behavior.

Unopposed mischief: Troublemakers will probe and push their limits with law enforcement to test what they can get away with sometimes with dangerous consequences.

Overwhelming force: The sheer number of masked hoodlums emboldens "groupthink."

Media complicity: Whenthe mainstream media proclaim these riots as merely "protests," the attackers have political cover.

Unarmed and defenseless victims: Although "campus carry" is allowed in eight states, California and New York are not among them. Knowing that victims are grossly outnumbered and without the means to protect themselves gives protesters unfettered boldness.

"They are fanatics, and by not surrendering, by not kneeling, and by not obeying, you have committed an unpardonable sin," wrote Kurt Schlicter, a senior columnist for Townhall.com. "You have defied the Left, and you must be broken. They will take your job, slander your name, even beat or kill you whatever it takes to break you and terrify others by making you an example. Your defiance cannot stand; they cannot allow this whole Trump/GOP majority thing to get out of control. They must crush this rebellion of the normal, and absolutely nothing is off the table."

What must parents sending their teens away from home for the first time consider and teach their children?

First, consider the college or university your child might be attending. Is there a history of rioting or violence? Does the school appear regularly on the news for demonstrations? You must know as much about a school as you possibly can before making a decision about attendance.

And then, once there students should practice common sense and personal safety at a time when conservative and right-leaning students are generally in the minority on college campuses.

Related: Reading, Writing and Revolution on College Campuses

Also, stay physically fit. Commit to exercising and eating right. Take self-defense classes. This should be a lifelong endeavor individuals will always ultimately be responsible for their own actions and safety.

Consider attending universities or colleges in states that allow "campus carry." In most instances, criminals will not attack people whom they think will defend themselves especially armed ones. Just being in an area where concealed carry is allowed will sometimes make a person safer.

As Bob Dylan stated so eloquently, "The times, they are a-changin.'" We must take modern-day aggression head on by exposing it, condemning it and preparing ourselves and loved ones mentally and physically against it. We have the capability but do we, as a civilized society, have the will?

John Cylc is an eight-year U.S. Army veteran and lives with his family in eastern Tennessee. His primary advocacy is promoting and protecting Second Amendment rights.

Link:
College Progressives Are Taught to Battle Conservatives | LifeZette - LifeZette

The shock of Hillary Clintons loss is only beginning to take hold on the left. The result is angry progressives whothink the country has made a shocking and sudden right turn which imperils their goal of a Marxist society. That is something the progressives are not going to accept without a fight, which has already begun.

Democrats have painfully dragged out the appointment of every cabinet member put forward by Trump. Politeness and decorum have been abandoned within the oldest of the nations institutions, the U.S. senate.

A former U.S. attorney and U.S. senator for 20 years, Jeff Sessions was Trumps nominee for attorney general. And while the legislative body encourages senators to treat their colleagues with civility, Senator Cory Booker (D-New Jersey), along with Georgia Representative John Lewis and Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Representative Cedric Richmond, impugned Sessions record on civil rights which they said disqualifies him from serving as attorney general.

Implicit in their condemnation of Sessions is that he is a racist. Additional allegations of racism were made against Sessions by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren who tried to read a 30-year-old letter by the now deceased Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King Jr. According to Warren, the letter sent to Senator Strom Thurmond criticized Sessions, who was then a nominee to be a federal judge. Warren has been known to exaggerate things, including what she has called her proud Native American heritage. At best, Warren is 1/32 Native American but probably has as much Indian blood in her as the passengers on the Mayflower.

Despite Democrat objections, the Senate confirmed Sessions as attorney general in a 52-47 vote that broke largely along party lines. Yet it is easy to see that Democrats could care less about the president and his cabinet tending to the many problems Americans have.

Their foot-dragging on approving Trump appointments is unprecedented. At the end of last week, Trump had just seven members of his Cabinet confirmed. By that point in 2009, President Barack Obama had 12 Cabinet members in place and President George W. Bush had his entire 14-member Cabinet.

Growing up in Canada is similar to growing up in the United States in one very political way. As the United States has a large minority of their population that is African-Americans, Canada has a large minority of French Canadians.

Since the 1960s, Quebec has been given special considerations and powers that the English provinces do not have. Yet Quebec has continued to be part of the Canadian federal system.

Quebec was given by Britain a constitution quite unlike that granted to other parts of Canada: there is no assembly; far fewer taxes and French civil laws are recognized.

In Quebec, French Canadians fully control the government of their province while English provinces under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Federal Government have made exception upon exception for Quebec to keep the French happy, including huge annual transfers of money. In 2013-2014 Quebec took equalization payments of nearly $8 billion from English Canada.

This is not so much to inform you on Canadian politics but to point out what has happened in Canada is happening in the United States.

Today there are greater charges of racism made against whites. Each year white America tries to become more accommodating in every part of society. African-Americans have things so much better today as compared to the 1960s. In Hollywood, black writers, directors and actors make major motion pictures and black American actors are widely recognized as some of the best in the world. Affirmative action is alive and well considering that the core of it, racism, albeit what is thought to be constructive, is thriving. Princeton and a great many other universities make it easier for black people to attend.

At all learning institutions there was a time when many were taught the writings of 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant coined the term of innate understanding, or what he called, a priori knowledge. Kant would argue that if it were wrong to give one group an advantage it was just as wrong to give another group an advantage. Apparently there is not much of Kant being taught today, and pretty soon his ideas may be stricken from the record. Students at the prestigious School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London say they want an end to learning from white philosophers.

Scores of people already label me a racist over the truths I write, but if schools of higher education dont teach white philosophers which includes the ancient Greeks and Renaissance philosophers and a few 19th Century Brits whos left, Biggie Smalls?

African-Americans receive a bonus of 230 points in their SAT tests. Even if a white kid studies for hours to do well on his SAT and scores 220 points over a black kid competing for a fixed number of positions, the black kid gets in and the white kid probably goes to a state college.

White America bends over backwards to show its appreciation of African-Americans, but the street doesnt run the other way.

February is Black History Month. Imagine if someone proposed a White History Month. That would make them a racist.

And the list doesnt start or stop there. Black people have:

African-Americans have BET. What if there was WET? That would be racist.

There are 107 black-only colleges and universities in the United States, including public and private institutions, community and four-year institutions, medical and law schools. What if there were 107 white-only colleges? That would be racist.

Peace cant be given or even bought at any price between the Left and the Right. Let me explain a conversation I had a long time ago which rings even more true as I have aged.

A close friend of mine was getting towards the end of a successful and prosperous life. One night he talked to me about his will.

There is a lot of money there and it wont do any of them any good, he said. And then he spoke about one of his daughters. She is not going to be happy with what I am leaving her.

It was rude of me to ask but without thinking I said, How much are you leaving her?

It wont matter, said the old man.

I bring this up because there is continued talk of white reparations for slavery. The United Nations has even weighed in with their usual biased suggestions.

A UN panel looking into the U.S. on a fact-finding mission that was published last fall said in a statement that it was extremely concerned about the human rights situation of African-Americans, stating that there has been no real commitment to reparations, truth and reconciliation for people of African descent.

Their conclusion:

Despite substantial changes since the end of the enforcement of Jim Crow and the fight for civil rights, ideology ensuring the domination of one group over another, continues to negatively impact the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of African-Americans today. The dangerous ideology of white supremacy inhibits social cohesion amongst the U.S. population.

I dont know why reparations money is thought to be owed, but as a person with German/Swiss ancestors, I owe zilch. And even if your great- grandfather had slaves, I do not believe that sins of the father carry over.

Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. Deuteronomy 24:16

More money and further advantages to African-Americans are not going to heal the racial divide that lays in Obamas wake and is widened every day by white progressives who could not care less about the average African-American who has to deal with soaring poverty and crime. Progressives are using black people as a tool towards a Marxist future. And while America has more than its fair shares of enemies outside its borders, the one that threatens it most is domestic rebellion.

Yours in good times and bad,

John Myers

. Bookmark the

.

Read the original:
Progressives declare war on Trump, his loyalists and his vision for America - Personal Liberty Digest