Plan’s carbon tax hurts the economy --- multiple warrants

1.4 Million Jobs Lost, $3.9 Trillion Hit to Economy As mentioned in a FAQ sheet attributed to Ocasio-Cortez’s office, “a carbon tax would be a tiny part of a Green New Deal.” Nevertheless, modeling a “tiny part” and showing the high costs of that “tiny part” demonstrate just how economically devastating the Green New Deal would be. Our tax begins in 2020 at $27 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions, increases to $54 the following year, and subsequently increases annually by 2.5 percent. In our simulations, we rebate the revenue collected from the tax back to consumers. In addition, we included carbon-based regulations on the manufacturing industry as well as mandates requiring the country to use significantly more renewable forms of energy than current projections. To quantify the economic impact of the Green New Deal, we used the Heritage Energy Model, a derivative of the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System. According to the Heritage Energy Model, as a result of the taxes and carbon-based regulations, by 2040 one can expect: A peak employment shortfall of over 1.4 million jobs. A total income loss of more than $40,000 for a family of four. An aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) loss of over $3.9 trillion. Increases in household electricity expenditures averaging approximately 12 to 14 percent. Unquestionably, these projections from the Heritage Energy Model significantly underestimate the costs of the Green New Deal’s energy components. As Ocasio-Cortez’s Frequently Asked Questions sheet notes, the carbon tax is only one of many policy tools Green New Deal advocates hope to implement. In the same FAQ sheet, Ocasio-Cortez’s office argues that massive amounts of spending are necessary—and “government is best placed to be the prime driver.” In other words, the resolution’s co-sponsors expect the taxpayers to pay for a massive, economywide transition. If policymakers spent, taxed, and regulated to achieve greenhouse gas-neutral energy, agricultural, and industrial sectors, the costs would be several orders of magnitude higher than those projected in the Heritage report.