City unveils carbon tax plan

[red states rule]

What is next from the libs - a tax on breathing?

Is there anything a lib does not want to tax?


City unveils carbon tax plan
Going green - Portland wants to charge builders who meet efficiency rules and pay those who exceed them Thursday, November 08, 2007DYLAN RIVERA The Oregonian Staff
CHICAGO -- In a bold move to curb the growth of greenhouse gas emissions from the Portland area, city officials plan to charge builders hundreds of dollars for each new home that is not extremely energy efficient. And it would require, as part of every existing home sale, that an energy efficiency report be done by home inspectors.

Believed to be the first of its kind in the nation, the carbon fee and inspection requirement would levy taxes upon builders who merely comply with the energy efficiency requirements of the Oregon building code, already one of the most stringent in the nation. It would then pay cash rewards to developers who make buildings that save at least 45 percent more energy than the code requires.

The plan will go before Portland residents, in hearings, in January. With passage, the carbon-fee rules would be in place by 2010.

for the complete article

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1194497715108680.xml&coll=7

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Taking from one rich builder and giving it to another rich builder seems typical Neo~Liberal Ideology.
2. Why don't they just award the better builders with tax breaks?
3. That makes far more sense.
4. Then the builder who is just meeting code, would perhaps strive to be a better builder, if the awarded tax break was worth it.
5. Some of the things that Neo~Liberalism does is very carbon neutral to fairness.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Great To See You Back RSR! :clap:

[red states rule]

Sorry bout that,

1. Taking from one rich builder and giving it to another rich builder seems typical Neo~Liberal Ideology.
2. Why don't they just award the better builders with tax breaks?
3. That makes far more sense.
4. Then the builder who is just meeting code, would perhaps strive to be a better builder, if the awarded tax break was worth it.
5. Some of the things that Neo~Liberalism does is very carbon neutral to fairness.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Great To See You Back RSR! :clap:

Next up will be a breathing tax.

Dems live to raise taxes and take more of the money we earn

[PostmodernProphet]

It would then pay cash rewards to developers who make buildings that save at least 45 percent more energy than the code requires.

looks like they intend to set the standard high enough to guarantee the city gets to keep the money......

[red states rule]

looks like they intend to set the standard high enough to guarantee the city gets to keep the money......

Builders in Portland on Wednesday were already pushing back.

"There is no way the homebuilders will ever support a mandated program," said Jim McCauley, vice president of government affairs for the Homebuilders Association of Metropolitan Portland. "This has largely been a totally internal conversation with only select invited parties."

[PostmodernProphet]

Red....that little button over on the bottom right of every post allows you to add to the thread without quoting someone.....

whenever you quote me, I take time to figure out why it is you disagree with what I said and how your post responds to it......

it's annoying when I get done and find out you didn't and it doesn't......

[red states rule]

I would like the envio kooks to explain how this tax will save the polar bears

[red states rule]

According to this op ed, do not call it a tax, call it a fee

That way the voters will not know the truth and go along with forking over more of their money to the government


http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_7393716?nclick_check=1


Calling gas tax a 'fee' may help at ballot
Transportation commission proposes levying 10 cents a gallon on fuel to help curb greenhouse gases
By Erik N. Nelson
STAFF WRITER

Article Launched: 11/07/2007 03:01:46 AM PST


In a proposal that fell on deaf ears in Sacramento last year, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's staff is recommending legislation that would make a gas tax a "fee," and thus make it easier to prevail at the ballot box.
Only this year, transportation officials say, the idea could be more palatable as but one arrow in a quiver aimed at reducing the Bay Area's contribution to global warming.

Under legislation that went into effect in 1997, the MTC has the authority to put a gasoline "tax" before voters in the Bay Area's nine counties. But the two-thirds requirement for taxes, the proposed legislative program says, is "a hurdle that most polling data have consistently shown to be out of reach."

Recent polls conducted by the MTC staff have shown that more than half of area residents support the 10-cents-a-gallon idea if it would help fight global warming and improve conditions on local roads and freeways.

Californians now pay about 55 cents per gallon in taxes, most of that in state and federal excise taxes, levied per gallon, followed by state and local sales taxes, levied as a percentage of purchase price.

Both MTC and the Association of Bay Area Governments last week challenged area leaders to support an aggressive system to curb greenhouse gas emissions that included congestion fees and parking surcharges for driving in urban areas during peak hours to raise money and prod commuters toward public transit. The plan also calls for opening car pool