Tyler Cowen on Carbon Dividends

Tyler Cowen breaks down the thinking that a carbon cap with dividends is better than a carbon tax:

A broader question is whether the carbon dividends in fact make the citizenry better off. First there is the question of the incidence of the initial carbon tax, which of course falls on individuals one way or another. Second, does just sending people money, collectively, make the populace better off? Aggregate demand effects aside, will the fiscal stimulus make the citizenry as a whole better off? No. Will printing up more money and sending it to everyone, even if that is popular, make people better off? No.

...

I fear versions of this idea whose (possible) popularity rests on tricking voters. Being pro-science also means being pro-economic science. (Emphasis mine.)

Read the whole thing.

Tags

More like this

David Goldston, writing in Nature, echoes a point I have been trying to make about the science provisions of the economic stimulus package. He lists some reasons why scientists should be wary of getting our funding this way: First, being included in the stimulus measure could turn science spending…
(I am going to try not to go on a big rant here; we'll see how well that goes.) Jonathan Cohn wrote an article in The New Republic looking at one of the critiques of universal health care: that it might stifle innovation. He presents his case as a balanced one where the relative trade off between…
There's been some discussion about Joel Kotkin's argument "The War Against Suburbia", kicked off by The NY Times making it their Idea of the Day. Leaving aside whether there should be a 'war against suburbia', it's just not true. First, there has been a decades-long policy of federal…
Robert Barro is interviewed in The Atlantic about his views of the stimulus plan (see also a recent WSJ piece here). All in all, he is not a fan: The Atlantic: And I take it from the Wall Street Journal piece you wrote last week... well, the piece is just specifically about measuring multipliers,…