“Economists have spent decades demonstrating the potential benefits of using environmental taxes to help finance the government (and make no mistake, a cap-and-trade system is a tax; the Congressional Budget Office, much to its credit, even scores it that way). But that economic logic works only when a substantial fraction of the revenues are used to improve fiscal policy — e.g., reducing deficits or reducing distortions from the tax system. The House bill does neither.”
【 在 Faith (faith) 的大作中提到: 】
: 曼昆的blog最近提到了Cap-and-Trade Bill和Climate Bill
: "A Missed Opportunity"评论的是climate bill
: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_djgssszshgM/Sknb2ldIMaI/AAAAAAAAA-A/uLgpK7lTuz0/s400/marrontable.bmp
: (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/06/missed-opportunity.html)
: "The Ugly Cap-and-Trade Bill"转述了另外两个人的评论
: ...................
【 在 Faith (faith) 的大作中提到: 】
: 浏览了第一篇，发现cap-and-trade似乎就是climate bill减排的具体做法。
: 但是，这种做法遭到了质疑：
: “Economists have spent decades demonstrating the potential benefits of using environmental taxes to help finance the government (and make no mistake, a cap-and-trade system is a tax; the Congressional Budget Office, much to its credit, even scores it that way). But that economic logic works only when a substantial fraction of the revenues are used to improve fiscal policy — e.g., reducing deficits or reducing distortions from the tax system. The House bill does neither.”
: ...................
但等我仔细看了关于《气候变化法案》的报道之后才发现，事情不是我想得那样。这个法案里控制温室气体排放的方法并不是对排放征税，而是通过限制和交易(Cap and trade)的方法—也就是政府规定总的排放量，各个公司也可以分配到相应的份额，然后这些份额可以进行买卖。比如有的公司希望排放更多，就可以从市场上去买一些份额，而份额用不掉的则可以去卖。