On Apr 24, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Patrick Bond wrote:
> Doug Henwood wrote:
>> But what about the rest of the economy? Metals have their uses beyond
>> direct job creation.
>
> Sure, but you'd agree - if you *do* think job one is avoiding climate
> catastrophe - that an enormous amount of waste (especially in aluminum
> and steel consumption) can be chopped out of a modern economy by
> rationing these energy-intensive ingredients, no?
Of course, that's the point of raising hydrocarbon costs. But that's what first concerned me about your desire to soak the heavy industrial users - the benefits of their work may not be immediately apparent. You'd have to do some pretty complex input-output analysis to figure out economic contributions, which would make simple energy intensity the determinant of the tax rate a very misleading metric.
Doug