I'm still not wholly convinced that the pending energy security legislation is a good idea. However, on the economic argument, anyone who says ACESA is a bad idea because Sarah Palin says so needs a stern talking-to. Such intellectual zombies also need to read this analysis and see this chart:
See that little orange stripe at the top? That's the EPA's medium-run projection of the impact of the Waxman-Markey bill on America's Gross Domestic Product, a decline that doesn't knock even 1% off the GDP for at least thirty years. That's the net adverse effect that Palin says would destroy the American economy.Don't you just hate how lame duck governors sit around behind their desks drawing a paycheck, having fun, and practicing for their book deals by writing bogus op-eds for elite East Coast newspapers?
Is it reasonable to suppose that the Environmental Protection Agency might be biased on this issue? ...
ReplyDelete... And who is to say for sure that the cap and trade legislation (as much as I hate it) might not actually have a stimulative effect the gross domestic product? A lot can happen in 40 years.
We have too many "experts," methinks, and not enough facts.
Cory,
ReplyDeleteIs the graph inflation adjusted? A 40% increase in energy costs is highly inflationary. The higher energy costs will manifest themselves in most all of our goods. GDP growth that is only due to the expansion of the money supply is not wealth.