Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

The Daily Score


 Email Post

Special Series

Climate Fairness

11

In a Series

Carbon Tax Confusion in the New York Times

Posted by Alan Durning
03/26/2008 03:33 PM
Op-Odd.

Yesterday, the New York Times lost its way on carbon taxes, publishing a confused and self-contradictory oped called, "On Carbon, Tax and Don't Spend." In it, Monica Prasad argues for taxing carbon and giving the proceeds to industry.

Charlie Komanoff has now skewered the piece, so I don't have to. Thanks, Charlie.

 



Comments
Posted by brett 03/27/2008 01:59 AM
So... is anyone writing a rebuttal op ed to run in the NY Times?
Posted by Morgan 03/27/2008 10:47 AM
I read the Times' OpEd, Charlie's retort, as well as some other related commentary. I think disagreements originate from different language and from different conceptions of what revenue recycling (the new term for tax shifting) refers to.

What I thought was lost in a quibble over the terms 'tax & spend', 'tax & don't spend', 'revenue neutral' and 'revenue recycling' is an opportunity discuss what we should do with carbon revenues, how they impact different stakeholders, and how they effect the economy. Imbedded in Monica's article was one of the key questions: Should carbon policy only seek to reduce emissions or should it also serve other policy ends? Reminds me of our tolling debate - should tolling revenues only go to road repair and maintenance?
Posted by MVP 03/28/2008 04:53 PM
Monica Prasad offers a thoughtful and well-reasoned response here.

Peace,

Michelle

Add a Comment

Name (required)
Email (will not be published) (required)
Website
See a list of html tags you can use in your comment.
(required)
This check is used to prevent comments by spammers.


Sightline Daily brought to you by Sightline Institute.

ORGANIZATION'S NAME GOES HERE!!! It will be hidden by CSS; we need it only for hCard compliance.
1402 Third Avenue, Suite 500 | Seattle, Washington 98101 | tel: +1.206.447.1880 | fax: +1.206.447.2270