? but Newsweek economic guru Robert J. Samuelson offers a forthright assessment of a proposed cap-and-trade program:
The chief political virtue of cap-and-trade ? a hugely complex scheme to reduce greenhouse gases ? is its very complexity. This allows its environmental supporters to shape public perceptions in ways that are essentially deceptive. Cap-and-trade would act as a tax, but it’s not described as a tax. It would directly regulate economic activity, but it is promoted as a “free market” mechanism. Finally, cap-and-trade would quickly become a bonanza for lobbyists, who would scramble to exploit the system for different industries, venture capitalists, localities and others.
The feds are not alone in considering this option: Daren Bakst dissected North Carolina?s pursuit of a cap-and-trade program last fall and followed up with more information this year.
A cost-benefit analysis from the Beacon Hill Institute of Suffolk University in Boston estimated that a cap-and-trade program would cost North Carolina nearly 30,000 jobs, $400 million in investment, $2 billion in real disposable income, and $4 billion in real state GDP by 2011.
