It’s no mystery why American companies have stockpiled over $2 trillion of overseas earnings in foreign bank accounts. If they bring it to the United States, the IRS would grab 35% of it. That’s the US corporate tax rate – the highest in the developed world, double the average in EU nations.
Medtronic found a creative way to repatriate its cash, allowing it to bring money to the USA subject to just a 12.5% tax. The company acquired Covidien, another, smaller medical device firm in Ireland and will establish its formal headquarters in Dublin, thereby slashing its tax rate by two-thirds, and leaving it with far more cash for plants and equipment, innovation, hiring and keeping workers, and tapping new markets.
In Washington, no good deed goes unpunished. So it's no surprise that Obama regulators want to impose giant new costs on the Texas economy — the very state that has led the nation in job creation.
We're referring to the Environmental Protection Agency's new "Clean Power Plan" to reduce carbon emissions from electric power plants. These rules are estimated by the Heritage Foundation to cost the national economy some $2 trillion in lost GDP and 600,000 jobs through the next decade.
But a new study shows that some states are much bigger losers than others. Just eight — Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia and Oklahoma — will absorb almost as much of the carbon-reduction requirements as the other 42 states combined. Texas and Florida are responsible for one-quarter of the plan's costs.
A debate is raging about whether or not taxing carbon dioxide emissions would create or kill jobs.
It’s a debate worth having no doubt, as job creation is something to think about when crafting economic policies. But like most policy debates, discussing job creation misses the point of taxing carbon in the first place: It’s supposed to stem global warming.
On this point taxing carbon dioxide is a fool’s errand. A carbon tax will do nothing to stop global warming on top of making energy more expensive and less reliable for everyone.
Ban Ki-moonAt the recent United Nations Climate Summit, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that “Without significant cuts in emissions by all countries, and in key sectors, the window of opportunity to stay within less than 2 degrees [of warming] will soon close forever.” Actually, this window of opportunity may remain open for quite some time. A growing body of evidence suggests that the climate is less sensitive to increases in carbon-dioxide emissions than policy makers generally assume—and that the need for reductions in such emissions is less urgent.
According to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, preventing “dangerous human interference” with the climate is defined, rather arbitrarily, as limiting warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures. The Earth’s surface temperatures have already warmed about 0.8 degrees Celsius since 1850-1900. This leaves 1.2 degrees Celsius (about 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit) to go.
A new briefing paper from the Global Warming Policy Foundation reviews the scientific literature on rainfall and floods and finds little evidence that there have been significant changes in recent years and little support for claims that they will become worse in future.
Despite claims to the contrary, there has been no significant change in rainfall trends in recent years both at global and UK levels. It remains very difficult to make strong claims about any changes there have been because of high natural variability in rainfall patterns, particularly in the UK.
Rep. Dan BenishekIn an interview with ABC 10's news director Greg Peterson, Rep. Dan Benishek (who is also a medical doctor), shared his views on global warming, leaving the viewer to wonder why Peterson thinks climate change is more important than the struggling economy and Michigan's dismal unemployment rate:
During a recent visit to a Skandia dairy farm, Dan Benishek (R-Crystal Falls) said he does not believe the many computer models and other climate change evidence.
"The climate may be changing, but I don’t think man is contributing to it,” Benishek said.
Fair enough. So now is Peterson's chance to ask the congressman those important, thought-provoking questions that people are actually concerned about: The anemic economy, Ebola, Obamacare, lack of job opportunities, Michigan's appalling crime rate, you know, things that voters want to hear about. But Peterson has a bone, and even though this "issue" is dead last in every single poll ever taken, he presses on. Bloomberg and Gore must be aflutter at this reporter's tenacity.
Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have demolished claims by global warming activists that global warming caused or worsened many extreme weather events last year.
According to NOAA’s new publication, Explaining Extremes of 2013 from a Climate Perspective, there is no discernible connection between global warming and 2013 extreme weather events such as the California drought, Colorado floods, the UK’s exceptionally cold spring, a South Dakota blizzard, Central Europe floods, a northwestern Europe cyclone, and exceptional snowfall in Europe’s Pyrenees Mountains.
The Capital Weather Gang’s Jason Samenow has written that the record long hurricane drought is leading to a sense of complacency in a growing south Florida population. New building in hurricane-prone areas is at greater risk as unsuspecting residents are lulled into a false sense of security.
But I would argue that, unless 9 year olds are now building on the beach and insurers have decided that hurricanes are no longer a threat, Floridians haven’t forgotten. How can anyone forget 2004 and 2005, with 7 hurricanes hitting Florida, unless they are only 9 years old?
And are 1 million new residents moving to Florida since then really that clueless about hurricanes? Have people moving to Kansas not heard of tornadoes?
Just makin’ stuff up.
Scientists have recently learned and reported that the near record-high sea ice levels near Antarctica don’t mean that global warming is not a factor at play. In fact, scientists believe the opposite is true.
Last month, on September 20th the ice level peaked at 7.78 million square miles. The 2014 level shattered the previous record which was set just a year ago in 2013. While scientists are not sure what the exact meaning behind the record levels, they do know a few other things.
Follow what was said there: “scientists believe“, and “not sure what the exact meaning” is but, hey, CONSENSUS, right?
As if on cue, settled-science believer Auden Schendler delivered a punishing retort in The Aspen Times to my recent column “Inconvenient Truths Denied By Climate Faithful” (Sept. 11, Commentary).
Archie Bunker-like in frustration, Schendler wants me to stifle myself. If I don’t “dummy up” like Archie’s wife, Edith, he suggests Aspen Times editors Think Again before publishing my commentary without peer reviews or risk “being complicit in promoting falsehoods.”
Schendler calls this “ground-truthing of scientific claims,” noting that the Los Angeles Times doesn’t publish pieces that “deny established climate science.” Like Robert Kennedy Jr., who recently called for the jailing of treasonous nonconformists who break with “settled-science” orthodoxy, Schendler insists it’s not censorship when there’s no argument.
Special interest groups and several of our elected and appointed officials who are very vocal and influential are on a crusade to throw the California economy under the bus.
We definitely need safe, economical and reliable sources of energy to maintain our lifestyle and economy, yet, this small group continues to pursue more regulations, more taxes, and uncontrollable fees, “camouflaged” as efforts to reduce emissions.
As a result of their successes, the public is forced to absorb the ever-increasing costs associated with their continuous support of Assembly Bill 32 since 2006, for products and services that are the basis of our lifestyle, standard of living and economy.