"Cap-and-Trade"? There Are Better Names

The American Spectator blog is looking for ideas--which led to this post.

The term 'cap-and-trade' was invented specifically to make the plan sound innocuous and bureaucratic--like "Form 8983" in the long, long, long list of IRS stuff that somebody has to fill out--somebody in a back office, attached to a calculator, and surrounded by stacks of printout depreciation tables.

You know: arcane, nerdy, with no actual effect on anyone's real life.

Wrong!!

"Cap-and-trade" is going to cost $630++ billion dollars--and YOU will pay that freight.

Reduced to its simplest, the proposal would 'cap' carbon (CO2) emissions from power plants, factories, and (eventually) general sources such as motor vehicles and homes. Utilities and businesses would pay to obtain permission to emit XX amount of CO2, and if they are able to emit less than XX, they can 'trade' their excess to another entity which needs permission.

But another way to look at it is that the "cap" is actually a "plug" stuffed into a utility's (or industrial's, or your car's) exhaust pipe. The 'trade' is actually a 'tax,' because the Gummint will pocket the $630 Bn. in proceeds from the sale of "permits."

Cap=Plug, Trade=Tax. Got it?

One more step to make this even more clear (scatological alert):

You can compare this to certain bodily functions. Emissions take place at one end of the body, right?

And Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District taxes you to emit, right?

Yup. It's MMSD on the 'trade' or 'tax' end, and their new weapon is a 'plug' stuffed....ahhhhh....you know where.

Now you get it. So help out the AmSpec blogger!

More here:

Mr. Emanuel said energy costs are too low anyway. U.S. car companies have relied too long on gas-guzzling autos and failed to invest in alternative energy vehicles, he said, and contended that the time for new auto fuels is now

What we REALLY need in a recession is a big hike in fuel and electricity costs, Rahm, you moron.